beta
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. Determination on the legitimacy of a subsequent appeal
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant submitted a written objection and a written answer regarding the decision on performance recommendation and the guidance of the court of first instance, and thereafter, it is merely a delivery of the authentic copy of the judgment by service by public notice on the date of pleading and the date of sentencing, etc., with respect to the Defendant. Therefore, the Defendant could have known the fact of the pronouncement and service of the judgment of the first instance court if he had fulfilled generally required care to conduct litigation, and such circumstance was merely a failure to observe the peremptory period due to the Defendant’s failure to investigate the situation of litigation, and thus, cannot be said to be attributable to the cause not attributable to the peremptory period. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion that the instant appeal is unlawful. 2) The Defendant sent the written objection and written answer to the purport that the Defendant was served with the decision on performance recommendation and the written answer to the appeal to the court of first instance. Since the Defendant’s representative director was a foreigner, and did not know about the progress of litigation procedures in the Republic of Korea and did not receive any contact after being sufficiently accepted, and terminated.
Therefore, since the defendant was negligent due to a cause not attributable to the defendant, which failed to observe the period of appeal due to the failure to know the pronouncement and service of the judgment of the court of first instance, the appeal of subsequent completion is lawful.
B. As long as the original copy of the judgment of the first instance court was served on the defendant by means of service by public notice, such requirements are incomplete.
Even if the service is valid, the first instance court is over the appeal period.