beta
(영문) 인천지방법원 2018.05.31 2017나8203

양수금

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. If a copy of the complaint, the original copy, etc. of the judgment were served by public notice as to the legitimacy of the appeal of this case, 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 observe 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 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 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 inspected the records

(1) According to the records, the court of first instance rendered a judgment to the Defendant on July 16, 2003 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da75044, Jan. 10, 2013). The court of first instance rendered a judgment to accept the Plaintiff’s claim on July 16, 2003 after serving the Defendant with a copy of the complaint and the notice of the date for pleading by public notice. On July 21, 2003, the original judgment was served on the Defendant by public notice. The Defendant obtained the authentic copy of the judgment of the first instance on June 29, 2017, and became aware of the fact that it was served by public notice after serving the original judgment of the first instance, and filed an appeal to complete the instant case on July 12, 2017, respectively.

According to the above facts, the defendant could not observe the appeal period due to a cause not attributable to himself, so the appeal of this case is lawful by satisfying the requirements for the subsequent completion of litigation.

2. We examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit ex officio on the lawfulness of the instant lawsuit.

Since a final and conclusive winning judgment has res judicata effect, a final and conclusive judgment is rendered.