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)The following facts of recognition are apparent or obvious to this Court in the records:

1) On August 18, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for payment order as Busan District Court 2016 tea8230, the Plaintiff filed an objection on September 1, 2016, which was served on September 1, 2016, by the Defendant’s delivery of the authentic copy of the payment order under the Busan Seo-gu B apartment and 1 Dong 505, which is his/her domicile, on September 13, 2016, the above demand procedure was implemented as a litigation procedure (Seoul District Court 2016Garo 99813, October 2, 2016), and the court of first instance issued the notice to the Defendant on October 17, 2016, but did not serve the notice to the Defendant as the Defendant’s domicile, but did not serve the written notice and the addressee’s unknown. The notice was sent on October 27, 2016 and sent on the following day.

3) The Defendant appeared on the date of the first conciliation on November 24, 2016, but did not reach conciliation due to the Plaintiff’s absence. 4) After the first instance court rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff, the court of first instance rendered a judgment on the date of pleading on December 16, 2016, the notice on the date of pleading on January 13, 2017, and the notice on the date of pronouncement on January 24, 2017, and rendered a favorable judgment on January 24, 2017.

5) On February 1, 2017, the court of first instance served the original copy of the judgment of the court of first instance on the Defendant’s domicile, but did not serve it as a director’s unknown. On February 9, 2017, the service of the original copy of the judgment of the court of first instance on the Defendant became effective on February 24, 2017. (6) The Defendant submitted the instant final appeal on April 6, 2017.

B. On its own initiative, we examine the legitimacy of the instant subsequent appeal.

Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “Any reason for which a party cannot be held liable” refers to a reason why the party could not observe the period even though the party had exercised a duty of care to conduct procedural acts. A copy, etc. of a complaint is lawfully served and thus the document of lawsuit cannot be served by means of public notice during the process of litigation.