1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is ordered.

1. If a copy of the complaint, an original copy, etc. of the judgment were served by public notice as to the legitimacy of the appeal for subsequent completion, barring any special circumstance, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence, and in such a case, the defendant was unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her and thus, the appeal for subsequent completion may be filed within two weeks from the date such cause ceases

The "date on which the cause ceases to exist" refers to the time when the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was rendered, and further the fact that the judgment was served by service by public notice is known.

In ordinary cases, only when a party or legal representative peruses the records of the case or receives a new original of the judgment, it shall be deemed that he/she became aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Da8005 Decided February 24, 2006. The judgment of the first instance was rendered after a copy of the complaint and the date of pleading, etc. were served by public notice, and the original copy of the judgment of the first instance was also served on the Defendant by public notice. The fact that the Defendant perused the records of the first instance court on February 8, 2019, and submitted the instant written appeal to the court of first instance on February 14, 201 is apparent in the records.

According to the above facts, the defendant was unable to comply with the appeal period due to the failure of the first instance court to know that the judgment was delivered by public notice without negligence, and thus the defendant could not be held responsible for such failure.

Since the court of first instance filed a subsequent appeal within two weeks from the time it became aware that the judgment was served by public notice, the appeal of this case is lawful.

2. Judgment on the merits

A. Basic facts 1) Real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”)

C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “C”) as its owner.

In March 2014, the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff deposited the instant real estate to the Plaintiff on 1,040.