beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. According to the records of this case, the first instance court rendered a favorable judgment against the defendant on August 23, 2018 after serving a copy of the complaint and a notice of date for pleading by public notice, and served the defendant as a result of service by public notice. The original copy of the judgment also served on the defendant by public notice. The defendant becomes aware of the fact that the judgment of the first instance was rendered only on November 26, 2018, and filed an appeal for subsequent completion on December 4, 2018. Thus, the defendant was unable to observe the period of appeal due to any cause not attributable to the defendant, and filed an appeal for subsequent completion within two weeks from the date on which the cause ceases to exist. Thus, the appeal of this case is lawful.
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. The facts of recognition 1) The defendant prepared and executed a notarial deed with No. 785 of C Law Firm Preparation No. 2007 with respect to promissory notes issued by "the defendant," on May 17, 2007, the date of issue: May 18, 2008; and the date of payment; and the issuer: the issuer: the defendant prepared and executed a notarial deed with respect to the plaintiff as C Law Firm Preparation No. 785 (hereinafter "notarial deed of this case").
(2) On October 30, 2007, the Plaintiff: “Around August 22, 2006, if the Defendant borrowed KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff without intent or ability to repay, he/she would make payment by making a lot of interest after three months; and (b) on December 22, 2006, the Plaintiff received KRW 10 million in cash; (c) on December 22, 2006, the Plaintiff created a false real estate lease agreement and displayed it to the Plaintiff even though he/she did not have leased KRW 35 million in the amount of the deposit of the Yeongdeungpo-gu D building E; and (d) additionally, the Plaintiff received the deposit and paid the deposit or paid the deposit after deducting the deposit.” The Defendant received a summary order of KRW 20 million from the Dong Police Station, which was the Defendant, to the effect that he/she received KRW 30 million in total, including the receipt of KRW 20 million.”
(U.S. District Court 2008 High Court 72802). 3 Defendant