logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.10.06 2016나1036
임대차보증금
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. If a copy of the complaint, an original copy, etc. of the judgment were served by service 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 is entitled to file an appeal for subsequent appeal within two weeks after such cause ceases to exist

The term "after the cause has ceased to exist" 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 judgment was delivered by public notice. Thus, barring any special circumstances, it should be deemed that the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was delivered by public notice only when the party or legal representative inspected the records of the case or received a new original of the judgment

(Supreme Court Decision 2010Da75044, 75051 Decided January 10, 2013). B.

Judgment

According to the records of this case, the first instance court rendered a judgment accepting all the plaintiff's claims against the defendant on November 24, 201, and rendered a judgment accepting the plaintiff's claims by service by public notice. On December 1, 2011, the original judgment was served on the defendant by public notice, and the defendant received the original copy of the judgment on January 14, 2016 and became aware of the progress and result of the first instance trial lawsuit and filed the appeal of this case on January 18, 2016.

According to the above facts, the defendant's failure to observe the peremptory period for filing an appeal is due to a cause not attributable to the defendant. Thus, the appeal of this case filed by the defendant within two weeks from the time the judgment of the court of first instance became served by service by public notice is lawful.

2. Basic facts

A. In around 2001, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the return of the deposit for lease with the Daegu District Court Branch of the District Court (201Kadan7887).

(b).

arrow