logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2020.11.04 2020나24788
건물명도(인도)
Text

All appeals by the defendants are dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendants.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

Determination on the legality of a subsequent appeal filed by Defendant E

A. Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides, “If a party is unable to observe the peremptory period due to any cause not attributable to him/her, he/she may supplement the litigation by neglecting his/her duty of care within two weeks from the date on which such cause ceases to exist.” In this context, the term “reasons for which the party cannot be held liable” refers to the causes for which the party was unable to observe the period, even though he/she had performed the duty of care generally to conduct

However, barring any special circumstance, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant’s failure to observe the peremptory period of filing an appeal should be deemed as attributable to a cause not attributable to the Defendant, if the judgment was rendered without knowing the fact that the Defendant had been pending, and only after the original copy of the judgment was served to the Defendant by public notice and became aware of such fact.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Da27195 Decided November 10, 2005). B.

According to the records of this case, the first instance court of this case notified Defendant E of the notice of the copy of complaint and the date of pleading by public notice, and notified Defendant E of the notice of the date of pleading by public notice, and rendered a judgment citing the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant E on May 13, 2020, and the original copy of the judgment was also served on Defendant E by public notice, Defendant E becomes aware of the fact that the original copy of the judgment of this case was served by public notice on August 13, 2020, and that Defendant E filed the appeal of this case on August 18, 200.

C. Examining the above facts in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, Defendant E was unable to observe the period of appeal due to a cause not attributable to the Defendant E, and filed a subsequent appeal within two weeks from the date on which such cause ceases to exist. Thus, the subsequent appeal filed by Defendant E filed by Defendant E is required to complete the litigation.

arrow