1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Determination on the legitimacy of the subsequent appeal

A. The defendant's assertion that the judgment of the court of first instance was conducted by service by public notice, and the defendant was unaware of the existence of the judgment. Ultimately, the defendant's failure to observe the peremptory period of the appeal is a cause not attributable to the defendant. Thus, the appeal of this case is lawful.

On October 13, 2015, the Plaintiff submitted a written appeal for subsequent completion on November 4, 2015, which had been two weeks passed since the Defendant known the existence of the judgment of the first instance court of this case on October 13, 2015. Thus, the Plaintiff asserts that the instant appeal for subsequent completion was unlawful because it did not comply with the peremptory period.

B. (1) Where a copy, original copy, etc. of a complaint were served by service by public notice, barring any special circumstance, 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 (30 days if the cause ceases to exist in a foreign country at the time that the cause ceases

The term "after the cause has ceased to exist" refers to the time when a party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was not simply known, but further the fact that the judgment was served by public notice.

(2) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the court of first instance rendered a favorable judgment against the Plaintiff on August 28, 2015, on the following grounds: (a) the court rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff on December 28, 2015: (b) the original copy of the judgment was sent to the Defendant by service by public notice; and (c) the Plaintiff was also sent to the Defendant by public notice; and (d) the Plaintiff was a debt collection agency. (b) The Plaintiff is a debt collection agency.