1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 8,483,148 as well as to the plaintiff on October 2003.

1. Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that "If a party is unable to comply with the peremptory period due to any cause not attributable to him/her, he/she may supplement the litigation by neglecting his/her duty of care within two weeks from the date such cause ceases to exist." In this context, "reasons not attributable to the party" refers to the reasons why the party could not comply with the period, even though the party performed his/her duty of care to conduct the litigation, even though he/she performed the duty of care to do so.

In a case where the original copy of the judgment was delivered to the defendant by means of service by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant shall be deemed to have failed to know the service of the judgment without negligence. In this case, if the defendant had already known the fact that the lawsuit was pending, the defendant is obligated to investigate the progress of the lawsuit, and if the defendant did not know the progress of the lawsuit before the court, it shall not be deemed to have been negligent. However, unless the defendant did not know the continuation of the lawsuit from the beginning and became aware of such fact only after the original copy of the judgment was delivered to the defendant by public notice and became final and conclusive, barring special circumstances, it shall be deemed that the defendant's failure

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Da27195 Decided November 10, 2005). Furthermore, the term “after the cause has ceased” refers to the time when a party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was delivered by means of service by public notice, rather than when the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was delivered by public notice. Barring any other special circumstances, the fact that the judgment was served by public notice was delivered only when the party or legal representative inspected the records of the case or received the original copy of the judgment.