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.

1. Determination on whether the appeal of this case was lawful

A. A. A summary of the party’s assertion 1) The Defendant was unaware of the fact that the Defendant was unable to serve the original copy of the instant complaint and the judgment of the first instance court, and the fact that the Defendant was sentenced to the judgment of the first instance court was known on February 3, 2015. Therefore, the Defendant was unable to observe the period of appeal against the judgment of the first instance due to a cause not attributable to the Defendant. As such, the Defendant filed an appeal for subsequent completion within two weeks from February 3, 2015, on which the cause ceases to exist, and the instant appeal for subsequent completion is lawful. 2) As long as the Defendant received a notice of the Defendant’s domicile or the Defendant’s receipt of the notice of the date of appeal and the date of sentencing, the Defendant’s failure to file an appeal within the period of appeal does not constitute a case where the Defendant could not observe the period of appeal due to a cause not attributable to the Defendant. Therefore, the Defendant’s subsequent completion of appeal

B. Determination 1) In principle, the service of documents in civil procedure is to be made by delivering a certified copy or duplicate of the documents to the person to whom the service is to be made (Article 178(1) of the Civil Procedure Act). If the person to be served is not present at the place to be served other than the work place, documents may be delivered to the office worker, employee, or cohabitant (Article 186(1)2 of the Civil Procedure Act). (1) The court of first instance served a duplicate of the complaint in this case on March 25, 2013 as the defendant's resident registration address (102, 605). (2) On April 1, 2013, the defendant's written notice of postal service was received by C, who is the birth of the defendant's wife at the above domicile, and on the same day, written the copy of the complaint in this case as the defendant's written notice of service on the same day, and the court of first instance stating C's written notice as the defendant's co-defendant as the head of this case.