1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Whether a subsequent appeal is lawful;

A. If a copy, original copy, etc. of a complaint was served by service by public notice, barring special circumstances, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment 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/her and thus, he/she may file an appeal for subsequent completion within two weeks after such cause ceases to exist.

Here, “after the cause ceases to exist” refers to the time when a party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, rather than simply knowing the fact that the judgment was served by public notice. Thus, barring any special circumstance, it shall be deemed that the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice only when the party or legal representative inspected the records of the case or received the original

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da75044 Decided January 10, 2013, etc.). B.

According to the records of this case, the court of first instance, after delivering a copy of the complaint and notice of date for pleading, etc. to the Defendant by public notice, ordered the conclusion of pleadings on November 5, 2015 and the judgment citing the Plaintiff’s claim. The original copy of the judgment was also served to the Defendant by public notice. ② The Plaintiff seized the Defendant’s claim against the financial institution by accepting the attachment and collection order of the claim under the title of execution upon receiving the judgment of the first instance court, which became final and conclusive on July 24, 2018. The Defendant obtained a certified copy of the first instance judgment on August 1, 2018 and filed an appeal for subsequent completion on August 9, 2018, which is not more than two weeks thereafter.

C. Examining the above facts in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the Defendant became aware on August 1, 2018 that a certified copy of the judgment of the first instance court was served by public notice, and filed an appeal to the instant subsequent completion within two weeks from that date, which satisfies the requirements for subsequent completion of the litigation.