손해배상(기)
1. The instant lawsuit was concluded on July 31, 2015 as deeming the withdrawal of the Defendant’s appeal.
2. After filing an application for designation of the date.
1. The following facts in fact of recognition are significant or obvious in records to this court:
On October 6, 2014, the court of first instance sentenced the plaintiff's main claim and the defendant's partial acceptance of the defendant's counterclaim, and only the defendant appealed the above judgment on October 24, 2014.
B. On December 22, 2012, the court ordered the Plaintiff to serve a copy of the petition of appeal by public notice, etc. on the ground that it was not served on the Plaintiff as a director’s unknown.
C. On April 21, 2015, the date for the first pleading of this case was designated as the date for the second pleading of April 21, 2015, and only the Defendant appeared and testified on the date for the first pleading of the Defendant, and the Defendant was notified on the date for the second pleading of June 2, 2015, but did not appear on the date for the second pleading of June 2, 2015.
After that, even though the defendant was served on June 8, 2015 with a notice of the third date for pleading designated by 10:45 on June 30, 2015, he did not appear on the third date for pleading.
E. On September 7, 2015, the Defendant filed an application for designation of date with this court on September 7, 2015, one month after the third date for pleading.
2. During the appellate trial proceeding, both parties were absent or present at the date of pleading on two occasions.
Even if no pleading is made, the appeal shall be deemed to have been withdrawn if no request for fixed date is filed within one month from the date of pleading for the second absence (Article 268(2) and (4) of the Civil Procedure Act). Such deemed withdrawal of an appeal is a legal effect naturally arising due to the fulfillment of the above requirements, and cannot be determined by the court or the parties’ intent. Even if the parties are willing to perform the litigation, such effect cannot be denied, and it shall not be arbitrarily handled in accordance with the court’s discretion or the contents and progress of the litigation case
(See Supreme Court Decision 81Da94 delivered on October 12, 1982). According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is legitimate from this court.