logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2018.05.15 2018다207342
손해배상(자)
Text

All appeals shall be dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

We examine the legitimacy of the instant appeal.

Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that "If a party is unable to comply with a peremptory term due to any cause not attributable to him/her, he/she may supplement the procedural acts in his/her negligence within two weeks from the date such cause ceases to exist."

Here, the "reasons for which the parties cannot be held responsible" refers to the reasons why the parties could not comply with the time limit, even though they fulfilled their duty of care to conduct the procedural acts.

In a case where a document of lawsuit is served by public notice because it is ordinarily impossible to serve the document of lawsuit in a normal way during the proceeding of lawsuit, it is different from the case where the document of lawsuit is served by public notice from the service of a copy of a complaint to the case where the lawsuit is served by public notice, and thus, the party is obligated to investigate the progress of lawsuit. Thus, if the party fails to investigate the progress of

(1) According to the records, the Plaintiffs filed an appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance on October 11, 2012 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da44730, Oct. 11, 2012). The records reveal that: (a) the Plaintiffs were present on the date of the second pleading; (b) the Plaintiffs were present on the date of the third pleading; and (c) the date of the third pleading, which is the date of the closing of argument, was notified on November 17, 2017; and (d) the court of original judgment issued the judgment on the date of the declaration notified; and (c) served the Plaintiffs with the original of the judgment by public notice on November 28, 2017, on which both the Plaintiffs A and C were not served as a closed language absence; and (d) the Plaintiffs registered the electronic data processing system on November 17, 2017, and registered the fact with the Plaintiff’s electronic data processing system.

arrow