2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

A. Defendant B’s subsequent appeal 1) The Plaintiff filed an application against Defendant B for an explanation of the property pursuant to the judgment of the first instance court. Accordingly, the above Defendant appeared on the date of property specification and performed his/her duty to specify the property. However, the above Defendant filed an appeal for subsequent completion on December 20, 2017, which is after the two weeks have elapsed from the above date. Defendant B filed an appeal for subsequent completion after the lapse of the appeal period, on the ground that it was filed after the lapse of the appeal period, and the copy and original copy of the judgment were served by service by public notice, barring any special circumstances, the Defendant did not know of the delivery of the judgment without negligence. In such a case, the Defendant falls under the case where the Defendant was unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her, and thus, the Defendant cannot file an appeal within two weeks from the date on which the date on which the cause ceases to exist. The “the date on which the cause becomes extinct” should be deemed to have not been simply the party or his/her legal representative at the time the judgment was served by public notice.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Da39734 Decided September 6, 2007). On April 11, 2017, the court of first instance rendered a judgment accepting the Plaintiff’s claim on April 11, 2017 after serving a copy of the complaint against the Defendant B and a notice of the date of pleading by each service by public notice. The original copy of the judgment also served on the said Defendant by public notice. Based on the judgment of first instance, the Plaintiff filed an application against the said Defendant on June 28, 2017 with the Seoul Central District Court 2017Kao1989, and the said court filed the application on July 28, 2017.