1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the defendant;

purport, purport, ..

The following facts are apparent in records or significant in this court:

On February 14, 2011, the Plaintiff filed an application against the Defendant for the payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) against the Defendant for the payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”). The Defendant raised an objection to the instant payment order and subsequently transferred it to the Seoul Central District Court due to the jurisdiction of jurisdiction.

On March 29, 2012, the first instance court which deliberated the case after the transfer (Seoul Central District Court 201Gao2710847), rendered a judgment that accepted the Plaintiff’s claim on March 29, 201 (the first instance judgment) when both the notice of the date of pleading and the notice of the sentencing date against the Defendant are unable to be served because the addressee is unknown.

The judgment of the first instance was served on the defendant by public notice, and its effect occurred on May 30, 2012.

Accordingly, the Defendant filed an appeal following the subsequent completion of November 1, 2012 when the ordinary time period for filing an appeal. The appellate court rendered a judgment dismissing the Defendant’s appeal (the second judgment) on the ground that the Defendant’s original copy of the payment order was lawfully served and was aware of the fact that the litigation was in progress by means of service by public notice, and thus, even if the original copy of the first instance judgment was served by means of service by public notice, the appeal is unlawful since it did not abide by the period for filing an appeal due to the Defendant’s non-liability of liability.

The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time as the defendant did not raise any further objection.

The gist of the Defendant’s assertion was forged by the Defendant’s application for subscription to the National Card under the name of the Defendant, which was presented by the Plaintiff as evidence of the said lawsuit, and thus, there exist grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure

The defendant is only the payment order of this case.