1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, the part against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) in excess of the amount ordered to be paid below.

1. If a copy of a written complaint of determination as to the legitimacy of an appeal for subsequent completion, and the original copy of the judgment, etc., were served by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence, and in such a case, the defendant was unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her and thus, he/she may file an appeal for subsequent completion within two weeks after

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.

(2) As to the appeal of this case, the defendant was not aware of the delivery of the judgment without negligence to the defendant, and the defendant was not able to comply with the peremptory term due to a cause not attributable to him/her, and the appeal of this case filed on December 20, 2016 is lawful since the defendant was not aware of the fact that the judgment of the court of first instance was pronounced. The defendant was issued the original copy of the judgment of this case on December 7, 2016, and became aware of the fact that he/she received the original copy of the judgment of this case on December 20, 2016, and filed the appeal of this case on December 20, 2016. Thus, as long as the copy of the complaint and the original copy of the judgment were delivered to the defendant by a service by public notice, it constitutes a case where the defendant was unable to comply with the peremptory term due to a cause not attributable to him/her, and the appeal of this case filed on December 20, 2016, which satisfies the requirements for subsequent litigation.

[Seed by the combination of principal lawsuit and counterclaims]

2. Basic facts

(a) A stock company;