beta
(영문) 인천지방법원 2015.08.13 2014나6015

공사대금

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Whether a subsequent appeal is lawful;

A. The defendant's assertion 1) The defendant did not know the facts that the lawsuit was filed without being served with the original copy of the complaint of this case and the original copy of the judgment of the court of first instance and the facts that the judgment of the court of first instance was pronounced. The defendant became aware of the facts that the judgment of the court of first instance was served by public notice only on March 28, 2014. Therefore, the defendant could not be able to observe the appeal period against the judgment of the court of first instance due to a cause not attributable to the defendant, and since the appeal of this case was filed on April 1, 2014, two weeks from March 28, 2014, which was from March 28, 2014, the date on which the cause ceases to exist, the appeal of this case is legitimate. 2) The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant had been lawfully served the copy of the complaint of this case on October 24, 2012, even if it was impossible to receive a normal service thereafter, the defendant himself was obligated to investigate the progress of the lawsuit and find the result.

B. In full view of the written statements as to Gap evidence Nos. 9, 10, Eul evidence Nos. 2, 3, and 4, and testimony as witness F of the party trial, the whole purport of the pleading is as follows: ① On October 12, 2012, the plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the defendant and filed the lawsuit against the defendant on October 12, 2012, and "the defendant's address in the complaint" No. 21801 (hereinafter referred to as "the instant building").

“The facts indicated, ② the court of first instance served the Defendant with the copy of the instant complaint on October 24, 2012. The F, recorded as “employee” on October 24, 2012, served with the duplicate of the instant complaint, and ③ the Defendant operates a distance from the instant building until May 2012.

On May 29, 2012, he/she transferred it to H on May 29, 2012, and reported the closure of the business on June 4, 2012, and thereafter worked in J real estate located in Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, and ④ The Defendant’s domicile on his/her resident registration is located in the Defendant’s domicile.