Whether a judgment delivered to a false domicile becomes a ground for retrial.

If the decision was served on the false domicile, it cannot be deemed that there was a lawful service, so the decision was not finalized, and therefore, it is only possible to file an appeal against the judgment, and it cannot be claimed for retrial.

Article 422(1) of the Civil Procedure Act

Plaintiff

Defendant

Cheongju District Court Decision 69Na59 delivered on March 18, 1970

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant (Appellant) are examined.

According to the records, the plaintiff (the plaintiff) asserted in the claim for retrial of this case. In other words, the plaintiff (the plaintiff) filed a lawsuit against the defendant on the 6th 1964-13 Cheongju-dong (number omitted) with the Cheongju District Court on the ground of sale on the 67th 5th 1963, and the court rendered a favorable judgment of the plaintiff (the plaintiff) on the 1964-3 9th 4th 5th 1964. The plaintiff's address was not known that the defendant's address was Seoul Seo-gu (the lot number omitted) and it was not a valid delivery of the above 1st 6th 4th 4th th th th 2th th th son-si, which was not a legitimate delivery of the original 6th th th th 1st th 1st th son-si, which was not a legitimate delivery of the original 6th th th 1st th th 1st th son.

Therefore, this appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Hong Mak-shan (Presiding Justice)