1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Determination on the legitimacy of the subsequent appeal

A. If a copy of the complaint of related legal principles and the original copy 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, and in such a case, the defendant was unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her and thus, he/she may file an appeal for subsequent appeal within two weeks after such cause ceases to exist.

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 rendered by means of service 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. Barring any special circumstances, barring 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

B. (See Supreme Court Decision 2004Da8005 delivered on February 24, 2006).

Judgment

In light of the foregoing legal principles, according to the records, the first instance court’s judgment that accepted the Plaintiff’s claim on January 26, 2016 and the original copy of the judgment can also be acknowledged as having been served on the Defendant by public notice, after a duplicate of the complaint of this case and the date of pleading against the Defendant were served by public notice.

Meanwhile, the Defendant appears to have become aware of the fact that the first instance judgment was rendered only when the Defendant was served on February 15, 2019 upon receipt of a written questioning of the case on the list of defaulters, and that such judgment was served by means of service by public notice. In the instant case where no evidence exists to deem that the Defendant had already been aware of the said fact from February 28, 2019 to February 28, 2019, the Defendant may be held liable.