1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

We examine the legitimacy of a subsequent appeal.

On June 10, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a payment order with the Seoul Central District Court (Seoul Central District Court 2013 tea41594) against the Defendant on June 10, 2013, and served the original copy of the payment order to the Defendant on June 24, 2013. The Defendant filed an objection against the above payment order on July 1, 2013 and served as a lawsuit claiming rent 2013 Ghana with the court of first instance. The Defendant was served with the first instance court of this case on October 8, 2013, and the Defendant was served with the notice of the date of pleading on October 23, 2013, and the Defendant appeared at the first instance court of this case on October 23, 2013; the first instance court served the Defendant the second date of pleading on the date of pleading and the notice of pronouncement on the date of pronouncement on July 24, 2014; and the Defendant did not serve the original copy on the Defendant on July 2014, 2014.

As above, since the defendant was aware that the lawsuit in this case was brought at the date of the first pleading after being lawfully served with the original of the payment order and the first day of pleading, so even though he had a duty to investigate the progress of the lawsuit, and even though he was unaware of the fact that the judgment against the defendant was rendered by means of service by publication, it is due to the defendant's negligence. Thus, the defendant's appeal for subsequent completion is unlawful because it did not meet the requirements for subsequent completion of litigation under Article 173

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed.