Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against Defendant D among the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's revocation part is against Defendant D.

Judgment on the legality of a subsequent appeal

A. If a copy, original copy, etc. of a complaint of related legal principles were served by service by public notice, barring special circumstances, the defendant shall be deemed not to have been aware of the service of the judgment without negligence, and in such a case, the defendant may file an appeal for the subsequent completion within two weeks from the date on which such cause ceases to exist because he/she was unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable

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 was

(See Supreme Court Decision 2019Da217179 Decided September 9, 2019, etc.). B.

Judgment

According to the records of this case, the first instance court served a duplicate of the complaint against the Defendants and the notice of date for pleading by public notice, and proceeded with pleadings on September 19, 2019, and rendered a judgment in favor of the Defendants on September 21, 2019. The above judgment also served on the Defendants on September 21, 2019 by means of service by public notice. The Defendants are aware of the said judgment upon receiving the duplicate of the Plaintiff’s petition of appeal and received the authentic copy of the said judgment on October 21, 2019. The Defendants filed a subsequent appeal on October 25, 2019, which is not more than two weeks thereafter.

According to the above facts, the defendants were unable to observe the appeal period due to the lack of knowledge of the fact that the judgment of the court of first instance was served by public notice without negligence. The defendants became aware of the judgment of the court of first instance within two weeks from the date when they became aware of the judgment of the court of first instance.