1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. As to the judgment of the first instance that was rendered on May 2, 2011 by the Defendant, the Defendant filed an appeal for subsequent completion on February 13, 2018. In full view of the records and the purport of the entire pleadings in the instant case, the first instance court, in which both the service of a copy of the complaint against the Defendant and the service of the authentic copy of the judgment, was conducted by public notice, and the Plaintiff filed an application for the instant case against the Defendant on January 19, 2018 with the Jeonju District Court 2018Kao73 for compulsory execution, and the Defendant was aware of the fact that the judgment of the first instance and the service by public notice of the authentic copy of the judgment had to be served on February 7, 2018.

According to the above facts, it is evident that the defendant did not know the fact that the lawsuit of this case was filed without negligence. Thus, the appeal of this case filed within two weeks from the date the defendant knew that the judgment of the court of first instance was served by public notice is lawful.

2. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person engaged in the marriage brokerage business under the trade name of “C”.

B. On September 2007, the Defendant entered into a new marriage membership agreement with the Plaintiff, and concluded an agreement with the Plaintiff that “When the marriage day is determined with C’s main marriage (where a de facto marriage is recognized due to a joint marriage or under other circumstances, a de facto marriage is recognized), the Defendant would pay KRW 3 million with a gender divorce fee, and the application and application fees will not be refunded in entirety, and the other matters correspond to the provisions related to the Association” (hereinafter “instant agreement”), and paid KRW 700,000 at the Plaintiff’s membership fee.

C. On February 2010, the Plaintiff introduced D to the Defendant around the end of February 2010, and thereafter, the Defendant continued to meet D with D and came to be hedging around October 2010.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

3. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff entered into the instant agreement with the Plaintiff, and the de facto marriage relationship between D and October 2010, which was introduced by the Plaintiff.