1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Determination on the legitimacy of a subsequent appeal

A. 1) The plaintiff's assertion 1) The judgment of the first instance court was conducted under lawful service and the judgment was delivered to the defendant. However, since the defendant's cause attributable to the defendant, the appeal of the second instance court was filed with the lapse of the appeal period, the appeal of the second instance court was unlawful. 2) The defendant's assertion that the defendant's appeal of the second instance representative director F conspired with the plaintiff and did not notify the defendant of the duplicate of the complaint of this case and did not take any action without notifying the defendant.

As such, the appeal of this case filed pursuant to Article 173 of the Civil Procedure Act is lawful, since the defendant did not know the continuation of the lawsuit of this case or the delivery of the original copy of the judgment of the court of first instance due to the plaintiff's illegal act and the F and the defendant did not observe

(b)The facts below the facts of recognition are apparent in the records or obvious to this court.

1) On July 14, 2015, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit with the court of first instance against the Defendant. The court of first instance served three copies of the instant lawsuit on the “Seoul Guro G Building,” the Defendant’s seat as indicated in the complaint, but did not serve on the closed door or the addressee’s unknown address. 2) The Plaintiff revised the Defendant’s delivery address on October 27, 2015 in accordance with the order of the court of first instance to rectify the address of the Defendant on October 27, 2015. On October 29, 2015, the court of first instance served the copy of the written complaint on the Plaintiff’s corrected domicile at the address of the Defendant representative director F, and served the copy of the written complaint with the execution officer’s method, and on November 2, 2015, the F is deemed to have received the duplicate of the complaint.

3) On December 9, 2015, the court of the first instance served the Defendant a notice of the sentencing date (non-drawing) on the following grounds: (a) on December 9, 2015, the Defendant was not served with the duplicate of the complaint as above; and (b) on December 14, 2015, the notice of the sentencing date was served with the Defendant as “Budong-gu H.” (spouse I).