1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

1. Whether a subsequent appeal is lawful;

A. If a copy, original copy, etc. of a complaint was served by service by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant was 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, he/she is entitled to file an appeal for subsequent appeal within two weeks from the date such cause ceases to exist.

In addition, the term “the date on which 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 public notice, rather than the time when the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was delivered by public notice. Thus, barring any special circumstance, it shall be deemed that 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

B. (See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Da8005, Feb. 24, 2006).

In this case, the first instance court rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff on August 13, 2014, after serving a copy of the complaint against the Defendant and the notice of date for pleading by public notice, and proceeding with pleadings on August 13, 2014. The original copy of the judgment also served on the Defendant by public notice. On April 1, 2015, the Defendant served a written examination of the case requesting for reconsideration of the defaulters’s list, etc., whose title is the first instance court’s enforcement title, on April 8, 2015, upon receipt of the written examination of the case claiming for replacement of the defaulters’s list, etc., at the Jeonju District Court’s military support,

According to the above facts, the defendant was aware of the fact that the judgment of the first instance was served by public notice on April 1, 2015. Thus, the appeal of this case filed within two weeks thereafter is lawful.

2. The facts of the basis.