logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.12.22 2016나6443
양수금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. Whether the subsequent appeal of this case is lawful

(a)The following facts of recognition are apparent or obvious to this Court in the records:

(1) On May 4, 2010, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit seeking the payment of loans against the Defendant.

On May 7, 2010, the court of the first instance sent a certified copy of the decision on performance recommendation, a litigation guide, etc. by mail to "Masan-si B," which is the defendant's domicile, but was not served as a closed door on May 14, 2010.

on June 3, 2010, the court of first instance sent a copy of the decision on performance recommendation and a litigation guide, etc. to the above address by the execution officer's service method, and the defendant's wife C received them as a live-in partner at the above address on June 21, 2010.

On June 24, 2010, the defendant submitted a written objection and evidentiary materials to the court of first instance regarding the decision of performance recommendation.

Applicant On August 6, 2010, the court of first instance served a notice of the date of pleading ( September 17, 2010) on the date of pleading on August 6, 2010 at the address, but it was impossible to serve the notice due to the absence of the closed door, and served the notice of the date of pleading on August 18, 2010 on the same day.

(v) On September 17, 2010, the first instance court rendered the judgment in favor of the Plaintiff, and sent the original copy to the address above, but the service of the original copy was impossible due to the absence of closure, and on October 22, 2010, the service of the original copy of the judgment by public notice became effective.

⑹ 피고는 2016. 6. 16. 제1심 법원에 추완항소장을 제출하였다.

B. (i) “A cause for which a party cannot be held liable” under Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act refers to a cause for which the party could not comply with the period despite the party’s due diligence to act in the course of litigation.

Where documents of lawsuit are served by service by public notice, because it is normally impossible to serve the documents of lawsuit in the course of litigation by public notice, the documents of lawsuit shall be served to the parties from the first delivery of the copy of complaint to the case of lawsuit by public notice.

arrow