1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. If a copy of a complaint, original copy, etc. of the judgment were served by means of service by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence, barring any special circumstance. In such a case, the defendant is deemed unable to observe the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her and thus, he/she is entitled to file an appeal for subsequent completion within two weeks (30 days if the cause ceases to exist in a foreign country at the time of the extinguishment

Here, “after a cause ceases to exist” refers to the time when a party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was delivered by means of public notice, rather than simply knowing the fact that the said judgment was served by public notice (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Da8005, Feb. 24, 2006). However, the first instance court rendered a judgment accepting the Plaintiff’s claim on May 16, 2019 after serving a notice of complaint, date for pleading, etc. with respect to the Defendant by public notice, and served the original copy of the judgment to the Defendant by public notice. The fact that the Defendant was issued the original copy of the judgment after July 22, 2019 and filed the appeal of this case on July 23, 2019 is apparent in the record.

Thus, the defendant's appeal of this case is legitimate since it appears that the judgment of the court of first instance was served by service by public notice within two weeks from the date the defendant knew that it was served by service by public notice.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings as to the grounds for the instant claim, C entered into a credit loan agreement with the D Association on December 31, 1997, stating that 14,000,000 won shall be extended from January 30, 1998 to 14.5% of the interest rate, and 22% of the overdue interest rate (hereinafter “instant loan”). The Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the instant loan obligation; the instant loan claim of D Association is against E Co., Ltd. on December 27, 2012; the instant loan claim of D Association is against Limited Liability Company F on June 14, 2013; and is estimated as of June 15, 2013.