beta
Text
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. According to the records of this case as to the legality of the subsequent appeal, on March 24, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for the instant payment order with the Defendant on and after the said order was followed by litigation procedures; the first instance court (Seoul Northern District Court 2015Da22905) rendered a favorable judgment on August 18, 2015 after the Plaintiff’s pleading was made through service by public notice; and the original copy of the said judgment was served by service by public notice; and the Defendant knew of the fact that the said judgment was being served by public notice after the lapse of two weeks from the date on which the said judgment was served by public notice; and it can be recognized that the Defendant filed an appeal for subsequent completion of the said judgment on September 18, 2015, which was before the lapse of two weeks from the date on which the said judgment was served by public notice.
According to the above facts, the defendant did not know of the progress and result of the lawsuit in this case due to a cause not attributable to himself, and did not observe the peremptory appeal period, which is the peremptory period, and filed an appeal of this case within two weeks after he became aware of the progress and result of the lawsuit in the first instance.
Therefore, the appeal of this case is lawful by satisfying the requirements for the subsequent completion of the litigation.
2. The parties' assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) If the representative D of the lending company lends KRW 175 million to the defendant, the plaintiff set up a right to collateral on the apartment owned by the defendant as collateral, and he listens to the words that he will act as joint and several sureties, and the defendant received the above money from D, and then the defendant prepared a certificate of the borrowed money. After which the plaintiff's husband C received the certificate of the borrowed money from D to the debtor and the joint and several sureties, the plaintiff's name was written in the blank creditor column as well as the defendant's name was written in the blank creditor column as seen earlier.
Therefore, the defendant is against the plaintiff.