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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

A. The plaintiff's legal principle as to the plaintiff's defense prior to the merits 1) "a ground for which the party cannot be held liable" under Article 173 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act refers to a ground for failing to comply with the period despite the party's due diligence to perform the procedural acts. Thus, in a case where a lawsuit document or its judgment was unable to be served while the lawsuit was in the process of the lawsuit by public notice as a result of the impossibility of being served by public notice, the party is obligated to investigate the progress of the lawsuit from the beginning. Thus, if the party did not know of the progress of the lawsuit before the court, it cannot be said that there was no negligence. Further, such obligation is not established if the party appeared at the date for pleading, whether the party was present at the date for pleading, whether the party was notified of the date for pleading after the date for pleading, or whether the legal representative was appointed at the date for pleading (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 92Da42934, Mar. 22, 1994; 25Da2575, etc.).

Upon receipt of the instant complaint on April 1, 2016, the court of first instance served the duplicate of the complaint and the litigation guide on April 20, 2016, as the Defendant received the instant complaint as the principal and the selected’s spouse, respectively, on April 20, 2016.

On May 13, 2016, the defendant and the appointed parties submitted a letter of party appointment to the court of first instance that selected the appointed parties as the defendant, and the defendant was present at the first hearing of first instance on the same day and presented a written answer demanding the dismissal of the plaintiff on the same day.

The defendant was absent on September 2, 2016 on the second date for pleading, but on September 23, 2016, on the third date for pleading.