외상대금
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
1. The following facts are either a dispute between the parties or a record.
The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming the payment of credit amount on May 22, 2015 without stating the name and domicile of the Defendant in the instant complaint.
B. After that, the Plaintiff submitted to the court of first instance, the name and resident registration number of the Defendant, and the Defendant’s domicile as “Seoul Gangnam-gu E Apartment, 202 Dong 201” to the party’s application for correction of indication.
The court of first instance tried to serve mail such as a duplicate of the complaint of this case, a request for change of the purpose of the claim and the cause of the claim, and a correction of the party indication, but it was impossible to serve three times due to the absence of closure.
C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff submitted an amendment to the court of first instance to the effect that the place of service to the Defendant is the Defendant’s resident registration address and the Defendant’s place of business as “Seoul Seocho-gu F and the first underground floor.”
The court of first instance served by mail a duplicate of the complaint, the purport of the complaint, the cause of the claim, the correction of the party indication, etc. at the place of the above correction.
The notice of postal service is written on November 5, 2015 by the defendant himself/herself to receive each of the above documents.
The court of first instance tried to serve by mail the notice of the sentencing date at the place where the above correction was made, but it was impossible to serve three times due to the absence of closure.
Accordingly, on December 23, 2015, service of notice on the sentencing date to the defendant was made.
E. On January 7, 2016, the court of first instance rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff without pleading, and attempted to serve the original copy by mail at the place where the above correction was made, but it was impossible to serve three times due to the absence of text.
On February 5, 2016, service by public notice was made against the defendant.
F. Since then, the Defendant filed an appeal subsequent to the instant completion on March 30, 2016.
2. Judgment on the legitimacy of the appeal subsequent to the subsequent completion of this case
A. The defendant.