전부금
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. If a copy of a complaint of determination on the legality of an appeal for subsequent completion, an original copy of judgment, etc., was served by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence, barring any special circumstance. In such a case, the defendant is unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her and thus, he/she may file an appeal for subsequent completion within two weeks
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 delivered by public notice, rather than the time when the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was delivered 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 the party or legal representative
(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da75044 Decided January 10, 2013 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da75044, Oct. 8, 2012). With respect to the instant case, the first instance court rendered a judgment accepting all Plaintiff’s claims on March 14, 2013 after serving the Defendant a notice of a copy of the complaint and the date for pleading on the grounds of service by public notice. The judgment also served on the Defendant by public notice. The Defendant became aware of the fact that the first instance court judgment was served by public notice only after receiving the original copy of the judgment on April 26, 2014, and the Defendant filed an appeal for the subsequent completion of the judgment on the same day is apparent in the record, so it is determined that the Defendant’s appeal for the subsequent completion of the litigation is a legitimate appeal meeting the requirements for subsequent completion of the litigation.
2. Basic facts are based on the executory exemplification of a protocol of recognition and acceptance of the claim for the shares of association members (No. 8852), which was received from DD reconstruction association (hereinafter “Re-building association”).