1. Revocation of the judgment of the first instance, and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Judgment on the legitimacy of the defendant's subsequent appeal

A. Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides, “If a party is unable to observe the peremptory period due to any cause not attributable to him/her, he/she may supplement the procedural acts neglected within two weeks from the date on which such cause ceases to exist, and if a copy of the complaint, original copy, etc. of the judgment were served by service by public notice, barring special circumstances, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence. In such cases, the defendant was unable to observe the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her, and thus, he/she may file an appeal to complete it within two weeks (30 days if the cause ceases to exist in a foreign country at the time of

Here, the term “after the cause has ceased” refers to the time when a party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was delivered by public notice, instead of simply knowing the fact that the said judgment was delivered by public notice. Barring any other special circumstances, it shall be deemed that the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice only when the party or legal representative inspected the records of the case or received the original

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da75044, 75051, Jan. 10, 2013). (B)

As to the instant case, the health department, the first instance court served a copy of the complaint, etc. on the Defendant on the grounds that the document of complaint and the document of guide of lawsuit was not served on the Defendant due to the addressee’s unknown and absence of a closed door, etc., service by public notice was also served on the original copy of the judgment of the first instance. On July 25, 2018, the Defendant requested perusal and duplication of the records of the instant case on August 2, 2018 and received a copy of the first instance judgment on August 3, 2018, and then filed the instant appeal for the completion of lawsuit on

As such, the Defendant was unaware of the continuation of the instant lawsuit, and the first instance judgment was served by public notice.