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. We examine the legitimacy of the subsequent appeal of this case ex officio as to the legitimacy of the subsequent appeal of this case.

Unless there are special circumstances, if a copy of the complaint and the original copy of the judgment were served by service by public notice, the defendant did not know the service of the judgment without negligence. In such a case, the defendant falls under the case where the defendant was unable to comply with the peremptory term due to a cause not attributable to him and thus the defendant is entitled to file a subsequent appeal within two weeks after such cause ceases to exist. Here, "after the cause ceases to exist" refers to the case where the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, rather than the case where the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice. Unless there are other special circumstances, it shall be deemed that the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice

(2) The court of first instance rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff on September 28, 2016, and the original copy of the judgment was also delivered to the Defendant by public notice, and the Defendant filed an appeal for the subsequent completion of the judgment on January 24, 2019 on the same day as the original copy of the judgment was issued on February 24, 2006. However, according to the records, the court of first instance can acknowledge the fact that the Defendant filed an appeal for the subsequent completion of the judgment in this case on the same day.

According to the above facts, the defendant filed an appeal for the subsequent completion of the case before two weeks have elapsed since he knew that the judgment of the first instance court was rendered and that the judgment was served by public notice was served by public notice. Thus, the defendant's appeal for the subsequent completion of the case is lawful by satisfying the requirements for the subsequent completion of the litigation.

2. Basic facts

A. C operates a mutual recognition house of “D”.