logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2021.01.15 2020나50201
대여금
Text

The judgment of the first instance is revoked.

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

All costs of litigation shall be borne by the plaintiff.

the purport and purpose of the claim;

Reasons

1. Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act regarding the lawfulness of the appeal following the completion of the appeal provides that “If a party was unable to comply with the peremptory period due to any cause not attributable to him/her, he/she may supplement the litigation by neglecting to do so within two weeks from the date on which such cause ceases to exist.

“The reasons why the party cannot be held liable” here means the reasons why the party could not observe the period even though the party fulfilled its duty of care to conduct the procedural acts.

If the court below's decision delivered to the defendant by means of public notice delivery, barring any special circumstance, it shall be deemed that the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence, and if the defendant was sentenced without knowing the fact that the lawsuit has been pending and the defendant became aware of such fact only after the defendant was served on the defendant by means of public notice delivery, barring any special circumstance, the failure of the defendant to observe the peremptory period for filing an appeal shall be deemed to be due to a cause not attributable to the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da27195, Nov. 10, 2005). According to the records and the purport of the whole arguments in this case, the court of first instance shall be deemed to have served the defendant by means of public notice delivery of copies of the complaint against the defendant, the notice of guidance of lawsuit and the date of pleading, and the judgment which accepted the plaintiff's claim on August 27, 2019, and the judgment was also delivered to the defendant on August 30, 2019.

According to the above facts, it is reasonable to view that the defendant's failure to observe the peremptory period of filing an appeal was due to a cause not attributable to the defendant.

arrow