1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 18, 2013, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant. On December 20, 2013, the first instance court served the duplicate of the complaint and the written guidance for the lawsuit on December 20, 2013 as Yangsan City D (hereinafter “instant address”) which is the domicile of the head office indicated in the Defendant’s corporate registry, and received it as a secretary of the General Affairs E on December 30, 2013.

B. The first instance court served a notice of sentencing as the Defendant’s address but did not serve as the addressee’s address. In other words, the first instance court served the notice of the date of pleading, the notice of the change date, the application for change of purport of the claim, and the notice of the date of pronouncement as of March 25, 2014, on the Defendant’s address, and served the notice of the date of pleading as of March 25, 2014, but all were not served due to the absence of closure or the unknown whereabouts of the director.

C. On May 28, 2014, the first instance court rendered a judgment accepting the Plaintiff’s claim, and served the original copy of the judgment on the Defendant’s address at the above address, but also served the Defendant’s original copy on June 5, 2014, and served the Defendant by public notice.

The original judgment became effective on June 20, 2014, and the defendant submitted a written appeal for subsequent completion to the first instance court on August 12, 2014, for which the period for appeal has expired.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, obvious facts in records, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the subsequent appeal of this case is lawful

A. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion was that there was no representative director F and no employee residing in F from May 2013 at the address of the instant case, and the Defendant did not operate his/her business at the address of the said address.

The Defendant took measures against the public official in charge of executing the judgment of the first instance court, and became aware of the fact that the instant lawsuit was filed after receiving contact from the said public official. On August 6, 2014, the Ulsan District Court became final and conclusive to lose the judgment after copying the litigation records.

3.2