1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

According to the records of this case, the court of first instance rendered a judgment citing the Plaintiff’s claim on January 23, 2019 after serving a duplicate of the complaint of this case against the Defendant and a notice of the date of pleading by public notice, with respect to the Defendant. The original judgment also served on the Defendant by means of service by public notice, and the Defendant’s perusal of the original judgment of the first instance court on August 27, 2019 after being issued with the original copy of the judgment of this case and becoming aware of it, can be acknowledged that the Defendant submitted a written appeal for subsequent completion on September 4, 2019.

According to the above facts, the defendant was unable to observe the period of appeal, which is a peremptory term, due to the defendant's failure to know the progress and result of the lawsuit in this case for reasons not attributable to himself

Therefore, the appeal of this case filed within two weeks from August 27, 2019, which was known that the judgment of the court of first instance was served by public notice, was filed by the defendant by public notice, was lawful by satisfying the requirements for the subsequent completion of the litigation as it was filed within the lawful appeal period.

2. Judgment on the merits

A. Notwithstanding the absence of a need for hospitalized treatment, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff was hospitalized in the Non-Party C Hospital for 15 days from June 10, 201 to June 24, 201, and received a written confirmation of hospitalization, and filed a claim for insurance money with the Plaintiff on July 6, 2011, and received KRW 697,850 as insurance money from the Plaintiff, and acquired KRW 13,561,220 as insurance money by the same method.

B. The written evidence Nos. 2 and 3 alone is insufficient to acknowledge the above assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Rather, in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each of the written evidence Nos. 1-2 and 3, the court of first instance rendered a public prosecution against the defendant with the same content as the above assertion, and the court of first instance rendered a final judgment of the Seoul District Court 201 High Court Order 2018 High Court Order