1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, KRW 7,00,000 against the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s incidental thereto on July 25, 2015.

1. If a copy of a written complaint of determination as to the legitimacy of the subsequent appeal and the original copy of the judgment were served by service by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence, and in such a case, the defendant is unable to comply with the peremptory term due to a cause not attributable to him/her and thus the defendant is entitled to make an appeal for subsequent completion within two weeks after such cause ceases to exist. "after the cause ceases to exist." "after the cause ceases to exist." "after the cause ceases to exist" refers to the time the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, rather than when the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, barring any other special circumstance. Thus, in ordinary cases, it shall be deemed that the party

(2) The defendant filed an appeal in this case on September 28, 2016, when the copy of the complaint and the original copy of the judgment of the court of first instance were served on the defendant by means of service by public notice (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Da8005, Feb. 24, 2006). As to this case, the defendant did not know that the original copy of the complaint of this case and the original copy of the judgment of the court of first instance were served on the defendant by means of service by public notice. The defendant filed an appeal in this case on September 28, 2016 and filed an application for perusal or duplication of records on September 28, 2016. As such, once the original copy of the complaint and the original copy of the judgment were served on the defendant by public notice, the defendant did not know of the service of the judgment without negligence, and thus, the appeal constitutes a case where the peremptory term cannot be complied with due to a cause not attributable to the defendant, and is legitimate

On the other hand, according to the statements in Gap 5 to 9, the enforcement officer of the Incheon District Court rendered the first instance judgment on September 1, 2016.