1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

First, we examine whether the defendant's appeal is legitimate.

If a copy of the complaint, original copy of the judgment, etc. were served by service by public notice, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence, and in such a case, the defendant is unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her, and thus, he/she is entitled to file an appeal for subsequent completion within two weeks after such cause ceases to exist (30 days if such cause ceases to exist in a foreign country

Here, the term “after the cause has ceased” refers to the time when a party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by means of service by public notice. Thus, barring any other special circumstance, when the party or legal representative peruses the records of the case or receives a new original of the judgment, the fact that the judgment was served by public notice ought to

(1) According to the records, the judgment of the court of first instance was rendered to the Defendant on January 10, 2013 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da75044, Jan. 10, 2013). The record reveals that the Defendant filed an application for perusal and duplication of the records of trial at the first instance court on January 4, 2016 and filed an appeal for subsequent completion on January 19, 2016.

According to this, the defendant's appeal is unlawful since he/she filed an appeal on January 19, 2016, since he/she had known the fact that the judgment of the first instance was served by public notice by perusal and duplication of the trial records on January 4, 2016.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed.