1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. We examine the legitimacy of the subsequent appeal of this case ex officio, based on the determination on the legitimacy of the subsequent appeal of this case.

Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “Any reason for which a party cannot be held liable” refers to a reason why the party could not observe the relevant period even though the party had exercised a general duty to act in the course of litigation. In a case where the document of lawsuit cannot be served in a usual way while the lawsuit was in the course of litigation and served by public notice, the document of lawsuit cannot be served in a way of service by public notice. As such, the party is obligated to investigate the progress of the lawsuit even if the party fails to investigate the progress of the lawsuit and fails to abide by the peremptory period, it cannot be said that the party is attributable to a reason for which the party cannot

(1) According to the records, the court of first instance: (a) served each copy of the complaint of this case on February 6, 2006 by Defendant B and C, the legal representative of Defendant C, respectively; (b) the Defendants were served with a copy of the complaint of this case on October 11, 2012; and (c) the court of first instance ordered the Defendants to serve the original copy of the complaint of this case on April 20, 2006 to the address of the Defendants, “Seoul Gangnam-gu D Underground 103 (hereinafter “instant address”); (c) the Defendants were served with a copy of the complaint of this case and did not submit a written response within 30 days; and (d) the court of first instance was unable to serve the notice at the address of this case; and (c) the court of first instance sent the original copy to the Defendants at the address of this case on April 20, 2006; and (e) served the Defendants by public notice on May 25, 2016.