(영문) 부산지방법원 2020.01.17 2019나3117 | 리걸엔진

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) 부산지방법원 2020.01.17 2019나3117

대여금 등

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

1. Whether a subsequent appeal is lawful;

A. According to the records of this case, the following facts are recognized.

1) On July 13, 2018, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant. 2) On July 27, 2018, the first instance court served a copy of the instant complaint against the Defendant with “Seongjin-gu, Busan, Busan, on the seventh floor.” On August 1, 2018, D, who is the Defendant’s work partner, received the instant complaint.

3) On August 19, 2018, the first instance court served a notice of the conciliation date to the Defendant at the same domicile as that of the preceding paragraph, and received it on August 22, 2018, and the Defendant also appeared directly on the conciliation date on September 6, 2018. 4) After the first instance court served the Defendant a notice of the date for pleading on September 20, 2018, but it was impossible for the Defendant to serve the said notice on the Defendant by means of dispatch, and on October 24, 2018, the said notice was served on the Defendant and the judgment in favor of the Plaintiff was pronounced.

5) On October 30, 2018, the first instance court served a certified copy of the judgment of the first instance on the Defendant, but it was impossible for the Defendant to serve the certified copy of the judgment on the grounds that the recipient was unknown, on November 6, 2018, served the certified copy of the judgment on the Defendant by public notice. 6) The Defendant was issued a certified copy of the judgment of the first instance on June 13, 2019, and submitted the instant written appeal on June 26, 2019.

B. Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “Any reason for which a party cannot be held liable” refers to a reason for failure to comply with the period despite the party’s exercise of generally required care for conducting procedural acts. In a case where the documents of lawsuit cannot be served by means of ordinary means during the course of litigation and served by public notice, the documents of lawsuit cannot be served by public notice, the first delivery of the copy of the complaint to the public by public notice, is different from the case where the lawsuit was proceeded by public notice, and thus

If a party fails to investigate the progress of the lawsuit and thus fails to comply with the peremptory term.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제173조 제1항

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2020.01.17 2019나3117

-부산지방법원 2020.01.31 2019나3889

-서울남부지방법원 2020.12.24 2019나67676

-창원지방법원 2016.02.04 2015나10220