1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The Defendant: (a) KRW 180,982,475 for the Plaintiff and its related expenses from December 12, 2013 to September 12, 2015.

1. According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance ex officio, the Plaintiff submitted to the court of first instance on December 30, 2014 a written complaint stating the Defendant’s place of service as “101, Syang post office box 101 in Gyeyang-si, Anyang post office,” and the court of first instance received it on January 7, 2015 by the employees of Anyang post office who received it. However, it is recognized that the written complaint was omitted in the process of post office classification and was not delivered to Anyang prison that was detained by the Defendant at the time.

According to the above facts of recognition, service of a complaint to the defendant of the first instance court is not effective, and the defendant is not required to submit a written answer within 30 days therefrom, and a judgment may not be pronounced without oral proceedings.

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair, as the grave litigation procedures of the court of first instance are in violation of the law, and the judgment procedures of the court of first instance are also in violation of the law.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da72514 Decided April 25, 2003, and Supreme Court Decision 2004Da11988 Decided October 15, 2004, etc.). Therefore, this Court revokes the judgment of the first instance under Articles 416 and 417 of the Civil Procedure Act, and re-examines the procedures for delivering documents, such as a complaint, following the new proceedings.

2. Fact that there is no dispute over the facts of recognition [based on recognition], entry of evidence A1 through 8, significant facts in this court, and the purport of whole pleadings;

A. On September 4, 2013, the Defendant: (a) dieded with the vehicle driven by E-gu on September 4, 2013, the Defendant, who kills C, fluened with C (the age of 17 at that time) and fluened with each other after having suffered the same traffic accident; and (b) developed into

From December 2, 2013, the defendant was living together with C in the studio of 1317 Fast Government-si in order to ensure that the defendant was living together with C.

After that, the defendant has heard the words that C would drink with other males, and has doubtful C's external appearance.

Between 10:00 to 11:00 on December 12, 2013, the Defendant is between the two male and drinking houses prior to the end of the 1317 room.