The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

The plaintiff.

1. Whether the subsequent appeal is lawful;

A. Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “If a party is unable to comply with a peremptory term due to any cause not attributable to him/her, he/she may supplement the procedural acts in his/her negligence within two weeks from the date of exhaustion due to the absence of such cause.

“The reasons why the party cannot be held liable” here means the reasons why the party could not observe the period even though the party fulfilled its duty of care to conduct the procedural acts.

If the court below's decision delivered to the defendant by means of public notice, barring any special circumstance, it shall be deemed that the defendant was unaware of the service of the decision without negligence. If the defendant was sentenced without knowing the fact that the lawsuit was in progress and the defendant became aware of such fact only after the defendant was served on the defendant by means of public notice service, barring any special circumstance, the defendant's failure to observe the peremptory period for filing an appeal shall be deemed due to a cause not attributable to the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da27195, Nov. 10, 2005). If the main copy and main text of the decision were served by public notice, the defendant was not aware of the service without negligence, and in such a case, the defendant was unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him, and thus, the defendant can file an appeal within two weeks after the date of service without any special circumstance, and the defendant's failure to comply with the final judgment is not a party or representative of the lawsuit.