(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.12.07 2017나43786

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.12.07 2017나43786

대여금

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

We examine the legitimacy of the appeal filed by the defendant.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 4, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the instant payment order (Seoul Central District Court 2016 tea77807), and entered the Defendant’s address as “Seoul G (hereinafter “Seoul”) and the place of service as “D (hereinafter “Seoul Yongsan-gu”) located in F” (hereinafter “the service place”).

The service place of this case was the location of D, and the original copy of the payment order of this case was served on March 24, 2016 as the service place of this case, and the “Semanwon H” signed as the delivery recipient.

B. On April 5, 2016, the Defendant submitted a written objection against the payment order.

Accordingly, on May 2, 2016, the first instance court served a notice of the date of pleading on May 2, 2016, and signed by “I” on May 10, 201 as the recipient of the service, and served a recommendation of correction on the 12th of the same month, and “H of Seo-won on the 17th of the same month” signed it as the recipient of the service and received

C. The Defendant was absent on the first day for pleading, and the first instance court rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff on July 20, 2016, following the delivery of each notice to the Defendant, as the notice of the date for pleading and the notice of the sentencing date are not served to the Defendant as the “not known directors” respectively.

On July 28, 2016, the first instance court served the defendant with the notice of the first instance judgment on July 28, 2016, and served the defendant on August 2, 2016 at the place of service of this case, “work Dong H” signed and received it as the recipient of service.

E. On June 5, 2017, the Defendant submitted a subsequent petition of appeal regarding the judgment of the first instance on which the period of appeal was limited.

[Reasons for recognition] Clear or non-contentious facts, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. In principle, the delivery of the relevant legal principles is to be conducted at the domicile, residence, business place, or office of the person on whom the delivery was made, or, if the service is not possible at such place, the recipient of the service is employed by employment, delegation, or other legal acts

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2018.11.08 2018나50337 (1)

-의정부지방법원 2016.06.16 2016나2513

-의정부지방법원 2018.01.11 2017나5915

-수원지방법원 2019.11.27 2019나3766

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.01.10 2018나22755