1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides, “Where 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 negligence within two weeks from the date on which such cause ceases to exist, and where the original copy of the complaint, the original copy of the judgment, etc. was served by public notice, barring special circumstances, the defendant is unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence. In such a case, the defendant is unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her, and thus, the defendant is entitled to make an appeal after the cause ceases to exist within two weeks from the date on which the cause ceases to exist.” The term “after the cause ceases to exist” refers not to the case where the party or legal representative does not know of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, but to the case where the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice only when the party or legal representative inspected the records of the case or received the original copy of the judgment by public notice.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Da8005 Decided February 24, 2006, etc.). The first instance court served a copy of the complaint against the Defendant and the date of pleading, etc. by each service by public notice, and declared a judgment accepting the Plaintiff’s claim on March 16, 2012 after the pleading was made. The original of the judgment also served on the Defendant by public notice, and the fact that the Defendant was issued the original of the judgment on July 25, 2018 and filed an appeal for the instant subsequent completion on the same day is apparent in the record.

Thus, the defendant could not observe the period of appeal, which is a peremptory term, due to a cause not attributable to the defendant, because he was unaware of the fact that the judgment of the first instance was served by public notice without negligence. The judgment of the first instance is service by public notice.