beta
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2013.11.15 2012나1157

건물철거 및 토지인도

Text

1. Of the part of the claim for return of unjust enrichment in the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant is limited to KRW 35,743,289.

Reasons

1. If a copy of a complaint of determination as to the legitimacy of a subsequent appeal, and the original copy of the judgment, etc., were served by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence, and in such a case, the defendant is unable to observe the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her, and thus, he/she is entitled to file an appeal for subsequent completion within two weeks after such cause ceases to exist. Here, "after the cause ceases to exist" refers to the time when the party or his/her legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, rather than the time when the party or his/her legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, barring any special circumstance. Thus, in ordinary cases, it shall be deemed that the party or his/her legal representative

(2) On December 3, 2011, the court of first instance rendered a judgment that fully accepts the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant on December 30, 201, and the original copy of the judgment was delivered to the Defendant by public notice on December 30, 201, and the Defendant was unaware of the fact that the first instance judgment was rendered, on January 17, 2012, received the mail, “the notice of the performance of the written judgment” of the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor and received the mail, “the notice of the performance of the written judgment” on January 27, 2012, and then perused the records of the first instance judgment and served them by public notice only on January 27, 2012, and thereafter, on December 30, 2012, the fact that the instant appeal was filed by public notice was evident.

According to the above facts, the defendant knows the progress and result of the lawsuit of this case for which he cannot be held responsible.