logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.08.16 2018나2022495
구상금
Text

1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

3...

Reasons

1. Judgment on the legitimacy of the subsequent appeal

A. Unless there are special circumstances, the defendant did not know the service of the judgment without negligence if the original copy of the complaint and the original copy of the judgment were served by service by public notice. In such a case, the defendant was unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him and the defendant may file an appeal subsequent to two weeks from the date on which such cause ceases to exist (within 30 days if the cause ceases to exist in a foreign country at the time when the cause ceases to exist). The "date on which the cause ceases to exist" refers to the time when the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, rather than the time when the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, and in ordinary cases, barring any other special circumstances, it shall be deemed that the party or legal representative becomes aware of

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da41318, Oct. 17, 2013). B.

According to the records, the first instance court rendered a judgment on August 20, 2013 after serving a copy of the complaint, notice of date for pleading, etc. with the Defendant by public notice, and subsequently serving the Defendant on August 20, 2013. The original judgment also served on the Defendant by public notice on August 23, 2013. The Defendant is aware of the fact that the first instance judgment sent by F, an employee of a new credit information company, was served on April 10, 2018 and the first instance judgment was served later, and the Defendant filed an subsequent appeal on April 24, 2018, and there is no evidence to deem that the Defendant either perused the records of the instant case or received the authentic copy of the first instance judgment by public notice on April 10, 2018, the two weeks prior to the filing of the said appeal.

C. According to the above facts, the defendant is subject to the judgment of the court of first instance without negligence not later than two weeks prior to filing the above appeal.

arrow