The part of the judgment of the first instance against the defendant shall be revoked.

The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

3...

1. Determination as to the legitimacy of the subsequent appeal of this case

A. On July 10, 2019, the Defendant asserted by the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor served the original copy of the judgment of the first instance court on the application of the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor, with the title of execution, and thus, the existence of the judgment of the first instance court was known at around that time. As such, the Defendant submitted to the court a written appeal for the subsequent appellate on July 31, 2019, which was the second share date, as the instant appeal for the subsequent completion is unlawful.

(b) The facts below the facts of recognition can be recognized by the record or are significant in this court.

1) On June 3, 2011, the court of first instance served the Defendant with a duplicate of the complaint of this case, notice of the date of pleading, etc. by public notice and made pleadings, and rendered a judgment of the court of first instance that accepted the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant on June 3, 201, and the original copy of the judgment was also served on the Defendant by public notice. (ii) On June 24, 2019, the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor obtained an execution clause to succeed to the original copy of the judgment of the court of first instance and filed an application for the seizure and collection order against each of the Defendant’s deposit claims against the Industrial Bank of Korea and HH corporation under the Daegu District Court Decision 2019TTT108659, and on June 26, 2019, the court issued the seizure and collection order (hereinafter “instant seizure and collection order”). The Defendant was served with the original copy of the instant seizure and collection order on July 10, 2019.

3) On July 10, 2019, the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff filed an application for a compulsory auction on the real estate owned by the Defendant with the Daegu District Court I as executive title. On July 11, 2019, the court rendered a ruling to commence the auction in accordance with the above application. On July 16, 2019, the Defendant was served with the original ruling to commence the auction on July 16, 2019, and inspected the record of the above auction case on July 18, 2019.