1. The plaintiff's appeal shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The record reveals the following facts.

A. On January 20, 2016, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit with the court of first instance, and the court of first instance decided to file a lawsuit on the attorney’s fees upon the Plaintiff’s request.

B. Accordingly, the attorney-at-law appointed as the Plaintiff’s legal representative proceeded with the first instance trial, and the court of the first instance concluded the pleading on May 19, 2016 and rendered a judgment against the Plaintiff on the 26th of the same month.

C. The court of first instance served the Plaintiff’s legal representative with the original of the judgment by electronic means, and the said original of the judgment reached June 7, 2016.

On July 16, 2016, the Plaintiff received a petition for subsequent supplement of the instant case at the court of first instance.

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff asserted that the appeal period was over, because it was impossible to contact with the fact that the original copy of the judgment was served after the judgment of the court of first instance was rendered by the attorney of the court of first instance, which is due to a cause not attributable to the plaintiff.

B. Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that where a party is unable to observe the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her, he/she may supplement the litigation by neglecting his/her duty of care within two weeks from the date on which such cause ceases to exist. In this context, "reasons for which the party cannot be held liable" refers to the grounds for not being able to observe the period, even though the party performed his/her duty of care generally to conduct the litigation.

(see Supreme Court Decision 2012Da64215, Nov. 15, 2012). The Plaintiff informed the phone number available to contact with the attorney of the first instance court, but the contact number was terminated, and the contact number was not known to the attorney, and the contact was not made with the attorney because the contact number was not known to the attorney. However, the Plaintiff knew the fact of the first instance judgment and the service of the original copy of the judgment by not notifying the attorney of his contact number.