beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.
Reasons
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 any special circumstance, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence. 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 appeal within two weeks from the date such cause ceases to exist.
In addition, the term “the date on which a cause ceases to exist” refers to the time when a party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was delivered by public notice, rather than the time when the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was delivered 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 or
B. (See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Da8005, Feb. 24, 2006).
In this case, the court of first instance rendered a favorable judgment on October 24, 2008 after delivering a copy of complaint and a notice of date for pleading to the defendant by public notice, and proceeding with pleadings on October 24, 2008. The original copy of the judgment also was served on the defendant by public notice. The defendant inspected the records of the judgment of the first instance court around October 26, 2015 as he/she became aware of the existence of the judgment due to the plaintiff's application for compulsory auction by official auction during October 2015, and submitted a written appeal for subsequent completion on November 9, 2015 can be recognized as obvious in records or obvious facts to this court.
According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant came to know that the judgment of the first instance court was served by public notice on October 26, 2015. Thus, the appeal of this case filed within two weeks thereafter is lawful.
2. Basic facts
A. The defendant shall guarantee insurance against November 25, 1991.