공유물분할
1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:
Attached Form
The second floor of the real estate stated in the list shall be put to an auction.
1. Determination as to the legitimacy of Defendant B’s subsequent appeal
A. If a copy, original copy, etc. of a complaint was served by service 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 was unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her, and thus, he/she may file an appeal to correct it within two weeks after such cause ceases to exist.
Here, the term “after the cause has ceased” refers to the time when a party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was rendered by public notice, rather than the time when the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice. Thus, barring any special circumstances, it shall be deemed that the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice only when he/she read
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da75044, 75051, Jan. 10, 2013). (B)
According to the records of this case, the court of first instance rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff on April 16, 2014 after delivering a copy of the complaint against Defendant B, notice of the date of pleading, etc. by public notice. The original copy of the judgment was also served on Defendant B by public notice on April 17, 2014. Defendant B filed an application for perusal and duplication of records at the court of first instance on April 10, 2015, and then inspected the records of this case and filed an appeal on April 20, 2015. Accordingly, according to the above facts of recognition, Defendant B was not aware of the delivery of the judgment of the first instance without negligence until April 10, 2015, and it is reasonable to deem that Defendant B could not comply with the period of appeal due to any cause not attributable to himself. Accordingly, the appeal of this case was lawful within two weeks thereafter.
(c).