beta
(영문) 울산지방법원 2020.10.22 2020나10251

손해배상(기)

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

Reasons

1. Determination on the legitimacy of a subsequent appeal

A. On January 2, 2020, the Defendant failed to serve the original copy of the judgment of the court of first instance, and submitted a written appeal of subsequent completion, which became aware of the fact of service by publication of the judgment by public notice.

Therefore, since the defendant could not observe the period of appeal due to a cause not attributable to him, the appeal for subsequent completion of appeal in this case is lawful.

B. According to Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, where a party is unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her, the subsequent completion of procedural acts may be made within two weeks from the date on which such cause ceases to exist.

"Grounds for which a party cannot be held responsible" under the above provision refers to grounds for failure to observe the period despite the party's due care to conduct procedural acts. Where documents of lawsuit cannot be served in a usual way while the lawsuit was in progress and served by service by public notice, the party is obligated to investigate the progress of the lawsuit since the party's failure to investigate the progress of the lawsuit and fails to observe the peremptory period due to the failure to investigate the progress of the lawsuit, it cannot be said that the party's failure to observe the period of appeal cannot be deemed as a cause not attributable to the party's failure to comply. The circumstance that the party's failure to observe the period of appeal due to the failure to know the fact of pronouncement and service of the judgment is not attributable to the party's failure to observe the period of appeal shall be proved by the allegations

(1) The first instance court sent a notice of the date for pleading on October 8, 2019 to the Defendant on June 27, 2019 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da44730, Oct. 11, 2012). (1) The Defendant received a duplicate of the instant complaint on June 27, 2019; and (2) the first instance court sent a notice of the second date for pleading to the Defendant on October 8, 2019, but did not serve as a closed door, and served by means of delivery, and on October 23, 2019.