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. Whether a subsequent appeal is lawful;

A. Facts falling under any of the following subparagraphs may be found to be obvious to this court, or a statement in Gap evidence No. 4, by integrating the purport of the whole pleadings:

1) On September 27, 2006, the Plaintiff’s acquisition amount stated in the purport of the claim against the Defendant and B (hereinafter “the acquisition amount of this case”).

(2) On October 7, 2016, the court of first instance filed a lawsuit seeking the payment of the instant amount. The court of first instance filed a lawsuit seeking the payment of the instant amount by serving a copy, etc. of the complaint on the Defendant, which was served to the Defendant by serving a public notice, and rendered a judgment of the first instance court citing the Plaintiff’s claim on December 20, 2006. On December 28, 2006, the court served the judgment on the Defendant by serving public notice. (2) On October 7, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for the payment order seeking the payment of the amount of the instant amount to the Defendant, B, etc. for the extension of the extinctive prescription period of the instant amount of the transfer amount claim (hereinafter “after service payment order”). On February 23, 2017, the said court served the original copy, etc. on the Defendant by serving public notice.

3) Around March 29, 2017, the Defendant became aware of the fact that there was a lawsuit or an application for a payment order regarding the instant transfer money, and on April 4, 2017, the Defendant raised an objection against the subsequent payment order case. 4) The Seoul Central District Court 2017Da5059877 for the case of the subsequent payment order was implemented as a litigation procedure (hereinafter “the subsequent case”), and the Defendant was directly served with its duplicate, documentary evidence, etc. during the subsequent litigation procedure on May 10, 2017.

5. On June 23, 2017, the Defendant filed an appeal to complete the instant appeal regarding the instant judgment of the first instance court.

B. Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “If a party is unable to observe the peremptory period due to any cause not attributable to him/her, he/she may supplement the procedural acts neglected within two weeks from the date on which such cause ceases to exist.”