대여금
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. On January 3, 2017, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant. The first instance court served a copy of the complaint against the Defendant, notice of the date of pleading, etc. by public notice, and served the Defendant as the date of pleading, and subsequently declared a judgment accepting the Plaintiff’s claim on June 14, 2017. The original judgment was served on the Defendant by public notice on June 20, 2017.
The fact that the defendant submitted a written appeal of this case to the court of the first instance on January 29, 2019, where the period for appeal has expired from the defendant. It is obvious in the record that the defendant submitted the written appeal of this case.
2. We examine ex officio the defendant's appeal on the legitimacy of the subsequent appeal.
A. The main text of Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that "if the parties concerned were unable to comply with the peremptory period due to any cause not attributable to them, the procedural acts may be supplemented within two weeks from the date on which such cause ceases to exist." In the case where the first instance judgment was served by public notice, the term "when the cause ceases to exist" under the provisions of the above Act refers to the time when the defendant was not simply aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, but the fact that the judgment was served by public notice is known. In ordinary cases, it shall be deemed that the defendant was aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice only when the defendant read the records of the case or received the original copy of the judgment by public notice. However, if it is deemed that the defendant was aware of the fact that the judgment was in question and there were special circumstances to recognize the circumstances, it shall be deemed that the reason was extinguished by ratification that the judgment became aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice by public notice,
(See Supreme Court Decision 98Da43533 delivered on February 9, 1999.