1. The first instance judgment, including the principal claim expanded by this court and the counterclaim claim filed by this court.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. If a copy of a complaint of determination as to the legitimacy of a subsequent appeal, and the original copy of the judgment, etc., were served by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence, and in such a case, the defendant is 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 after such cause ceases to exist. Here, "after the cause ceases to exist" refers to the time when the party or his/her legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, rather than the time when the party or his/her legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, barring any special circumstance. Thus, in ordinary cases, it shall be deemed that the party or his/her legal representative

(2) In light of the relevant legal principles, the court of first instance rendered a judgment to the Defendant on June 25, 2014 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Da8005, Feb. 24, 2006). In light of the relevant legal principles, the court of first instance sent a notice of the complaint and the date of pleading to the Defendant by public notice, and accepted the Plaintiff’s claim on June 25, 2014. The original copy of the judgment was also sent to the Defendant by public notice on June 26, 2014. The Defendant became aware of the fact that the court of first instance became aware of the fact that the Defendant filed an application for perusal and duplication of the records of the first instance court on July 20, 2015, and that the Defendant filed an appeal of the instant case on July 31, 2015 by public notice.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant was unable to comply with the peremptory period on the ground that he was unable to be held liable due to the failure of the judgment of the first instance to know that it was served by public notice

The appeal of this case is filed by the defendant.