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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

The court of the first instance sentenced the judgment on May 25, 2017. The original copy of the judgment of the first instance was served on the Plaintiff on May 30, 2017. The fact that the Plaintiff filed an appeal for the subsequent completion of the judgment of the first instance on June 15, 2017 after the lapse of two weeks of appeal period ( June 13, 2017), which is a peremptory term, from the service date of the said service date, is clear.

Plaintiff’s assertion

The plaintiff's assertion on this issue was that the plaintiff could not comply with the necessary period of appeal due to the lack of appropriate guidance on the appeal procedure by the foreigner and the labor for maintaining his livelihood.

As such, since the plaintiff could not observe the appeal period due to a cause not attributable to him, the subsequent completion of procedural acts should be recognized.

Judgment

Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, which applies mutatis mutandis to the administrative litigation, provides that “if a party is unable to comply with the peremptory period due to any cause not attributable to him/her, he/she may supplement the procedural acts neglected within two weeks from the date such cause ceases to exist.” In this context, the term “reasons for which the party cannot be held liable” refers to the reasons for which the party was unable to comply with the period, even though he/she had paid general attention

(See Supreme Court Decision 97Da50152 Decided October 2, 1998, etc.). The Plaintiff, as a party to a lawsuit, is naturally obligated to verify the progress and result of the litigation procedures, and conduct litigation in accordance with the phase. Even if considering all the aforementioned circumstances cited by the Plaintiff, it cannot be deemed that there was “reasons for which the party cannot be held liable” under the provisions of the Civil Procedure Act, as the Plaintiff did not observe the appeal period.

Therefore, the appeal of this case did not meet the requirements for completion of the litigation, and the defects cannot be corrected.