2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

According to records, the following facts are recognized.

① On June 18, 2019, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit seeking payment of overdue wages against the Defendant.

② On July 9, 2019, the first instance court rendered a decision on performance recommendation by attaching a copy of the complaint submitted by the Plaintiff as an attached Form.

③ On July 12, 2019, the Defendant filed an objection on July 26, 2019, within two weeks after receiving a certified copy of the decision on performance recommendation.

④ After the first instance court, on October 2, 2019, the date for pleading was opened, but the Defendant was absent on the said date for pleading even after receiving a notice of the date for pleading, and the first instance court closed pleadings and rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff immediately pursuant to Article 11-2(1) of the Trial of Small Claims Act.

⑤ When the original copy of the judgment of the first instance was impossible to be served due to a lack of door at the Defendant’s domicile, the original copy of the judgment of the first instance was served on October 17, 2019 to the Defendant by means of service by public notice, and such service became effective on November 1, 2019.

6) On November 15, 2019, the Defendant filed the instant appeal.

An appeal shall be filed within two weeks from the date on which the written judgment is served, and the above period is a peremptory term.

(Article 396 of the Civil Procedure Act). Service by public notice on the original copy of the judgment of the first instance takes effect on November 1, 2019, and in this case, the first day is to be included in the calculation of the appeal period (Article 157 of the Civil Act). Thus, the Defendant should have appealed up to November 14, 2019 until November 24, 200.

Nevertheless, since the Defendant appealed on November 15, 2019 after the expiration of the period of appeal, the instant appeal is unlawful.

On the other hand, the Defendant had a duty to investigate the progress of the lawsuit, unlike the case where the lawsuit was initiated by service of a copy of the written decision on performance recommendation and the first written notice of the date of pleading by public notice, since the Defendant had been served normally by means of the ordinary method.

Therefore, even if the original judgment was served by public notice, the defendant is also serving by public notice.