beta
Text
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. If a copy of the complaint, the original copy, etc. of the judgment regarding the legitimacy of the appeal of this case were served by service by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence, barring any special circumstance. In such a case, the defendant is unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her, and thus, he/she is entitled to file an appeal of subsequent completion within two weeks (30 days if the cause ceases to exist in a foreign country at the
(2) The court of first instance rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff on September 5, 2013 after serving a copy of the complaint against the Defendant and a notice of date for pleading by public notice. The original copy of the judgment also served on the Defendant by public notice. The Defendant was aware of the fact that the first instance judgment was rendered on October 29, 2013, and filed an appeal to complete the instant lawsuit on October 31, 2013. According to the above facts of recognition, the first instance judgment was rendered without knowing the continuation of the lawsuit in this case, and the Defendant was unable to know the delivery of the judgment in the first instance without negligence by serving the original copy of the judgment by public notice. As such, the court of first instance satisfied the requirements for subsequent completion of the litigation in this case within two weeks from the date on which the Defendant became aware of the fact that the original copy of the judgment was rendered by public notice was served on the Defendant by public notice, thereby satisfying the requirements for subsequent completion of the litigation in this case.
2. Judgment on the parties' arguments
A. The plaintiff's assertion was completed by being awarded a contract for the construction of the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government building and the construction of the Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government building from the defendant. However, since the plaintiff did not receive a total of KRW 22,415,700 for each of the above construction, the defendant is liable to pay the construction price of KRW 22,415,700 for the plaintiff and the delay damages.
As to this, the defendant.