1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff succeeding intervenor's claim is dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit.

1. If a copy of the complaint on the legitimacy of the defendant's appeal and the original copy of the judgment were served by service by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant was not aware of the service of the judgment without negligence. Thus, in such a case, the defendant was unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him.

(2) A subsequent appeal may be filed within two weeks after the cause has ceased to exist.

Article 173 of the Civil Procedure Act in the case of service by public notice by the court of first instance means that the defendant does not know the fact that the reason ceases to exist, but the fact that the judgment was served by public notice was served by public notice. In ordinary cases, it should be deemed that the defendant knew that the judgment was served by public notice only when the defendant read the records of the case or received the original judgment by public notice.

(see Supreme Court Decision 97Da20410, Oct. 24, 1997). The first instance court, after serving a copy of the complaint against the Defendant, notice of the date of pleading, etc. by public notice, made a judgment accepting the Plaintiff’s claim on May 18, 2009, the original copy of the judgment was served on the Defendant by public notice on June 12, 2009. The fact that the original copy of the judgment was served on the Defendant by public notice on July 24, 2018, and that the Defendant was served on the Defendant by public notice after being issued the original copy of the judgment of the first instance on July 24, 2018, and that the first instance court filed a subsequent appeal on July 31, 2018 is clear.

Therefore, since the defendant could not comply with the appeal period, which is the peremptory period, due to a cause not attributable to him, the appeal of this case filed within two weeks from the date on which the court of first instance became aware of the fact by public notice is lawful.

2. Judgment on the merits

A. Facts of recognition 1) The defendant is the E Co., Ltd. (E) around June 12, 2002.

A contract for the use of credit cards is concluded with that.