건물인도 등
1. The appeal by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) shall be dismissed;
2. The defendant-Counterclaim plaintiff's counterclaim filed by this court.
1. Whether the defendant's subsequent appeal is legitimate
A. Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act of the relevant legal doctrine refers to the reason why a party cannot comply with the period even though the party fulfilled his/her duty of care to conduct a procedural act.
In a case where a document of lawsuit is served by public notice because it is ordinarily impossible to serve the document of lawsuit in the course of the lawsuit by public notice, since the service of the original copy of complaint to the case where the lawsuit was served by public notice, and thus, the party is obligated to investigate the progress of the lawsuit. Thus, if the party fails to investigate the progress of such lawsuit and fails to abide by the peremptory period, it cannot be deemed that the party’
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da44730, Oct. 11, 2012). B.
Judgment
The facts that the instant complaint was served on the Defendant on February 7, 2018, and the Defendant submitted a written response to the first instance court on March 7, 2018, and the first instance court rendered a judgment of the first instance court on July 17, 2018 and served the original copy of the judgment to the Defendant on July 24, 2018, but it was impossible to serve the original copy of the judgment on the Defendant on July 26, 2018, the fact that the original copy of the first instance judgment was served to the Defendant on August 10, 2018, and that the Defendant filed a subsequent appeal to the first instance court on September 17, 2018 is evident.
Therefore, the defendant, who received a legally copy of the complaint, failed to comply with the peremptory appeal period, even though he/she was obligated to investigate the progress of the lawsuit in this case, and thus, cannot be deemed to be due to a cause not attributable to the defendant.
Ultimately, the Defendant’s appeal of this case is unlawful.
2. Judgment on the defendant's counterclaim
A. The Defendant’s assertion 1 leased the building indicated in the separate sheet that the Plaintiff had a bad sanitary condition to the Defendant, and the lessor is the lessor.