1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

If a copy, original copy, etc. of the complaint were served by service by public notice, barring special circumstances, the defendant shall be deemed to have failed to know the service of the judgment without negligence. In such a case, the defendant was unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him

may file a subsequent appeal within two weeks after the cause has ceased to exist.

However, even if the defendant knows that the action was brought, he neglected it.

If service by public notice has not been made to the reported address or by public notice, even though the fact that the judgment was served by public notice was not known to the defendant, there is negligence on the defendant.

As such, the defendant's appeal for subsequent completion is unlawful.

(1) After filing the instant lawsuit on October 28, 2010 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Meu2082, Oct. 28, 2010). On June 27, 2014, the court of first instance rendered an order to correct the address to the Plaintiff on July 10, 2014 when the Plaintiff was unable to serve the original copy of the complaint on the Plaintiff as “Seoul Gangnam-gu K, 303,” in which the Plaintiff entered, but failed to serve the original copy of the complaint on the Defendant on the resident registration, and the court issued an order to correct the address to the Plaintiff on July 10, 2014. As the Plaintiff’s address was revised to “Usan-gu L, Busan-gu, U.S., the address of the Defendant on the resident registration, and the service of the original copy was impossible again impossible due to the unknown address of the Plaintiff. However, the court rendered an order to serve the original copy by public notice on the Defendant on the same date.