beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. Determination on the legality of the appeal of this case
A. Subsequent completion of procedural acts is able to supplement the procedural acts in which the party is unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him, within two weeks from the date on which such cause ceases to exist (Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act). If a copy of the complaint, the original copy of judgment, etc. are served by means of service by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is not aware of the service of the judgment without negligence, and in such case, the defendant may file an appeal for subsequent completion within two weeks from the date on which 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 delivered by public notice, instead of simply knowing the fact that the said judgment was delivered by public notice. 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 records of the case or received a new original of the judgment.
(See Supreme Court Decision 97Da20410 delivered on October 24, 1997). B.
According to the records, the defendant is recognized as having submitted the application for perusal and duplication of the records of the first instance trial on June 13, 2016.
On June 13, 2016, the Plaintiff asserted that the appeal filed on June 28, 2016 by the Defendant was unlawful, since the Defendant confirmed the judgment of the first instance court on June 13, 2016.
However, the defendant asserts that the defendant did not confirm the judgment of the court of first instance on June 13, 2016, but it was confirmed by being issued the authentic copy of the judgment of the court of first instance on June 15, 2016.
According to the records, the defendant was the first instance court on June 15, 2016.