1. The plaintiff's appeal shall be dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. We examine, ex officio, the determination on the legitimacy of the subsequent appeal by the Plaintiff on the legitimacy of the subsequent appeal.

A. On February 25, 2019, the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion asserted that the appeal period cannot be observed due to a cause not attributable to the Plaintiff, in light of the following: (a) the Plaintiff was served with an authentic copy of the judgment of the first instance on February 25, 2019, but the Plaintiff was served with a local business trip from February 26, 2019 to March 11, 2019 during the appeal period; (b) the delivery of the authentic copy of the judgment of the first instance was served with the local business trip from February 26, 2019 to March 11, 2019; and (c) it

B. Determination 1) In the first instance court, pursuant to Article 184 of the Civil Procedure Act, the Plaintiff reported “B” as the place of delivery, “E” as the recipient of delivery, and received the original copy of the first instance judgment as of February 25, 2019. The fact that the Plaintiff filed a petition of appeal on March 12, 2019 with the limit of the appeal period was either disputed between the parties or is clear by record. 2) Subsequent completion of procedural acts under Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act is possible only where the parties could not comply with the peremptory term due to a cause not attributable to them. Here, the term “reasons not attributable to the parties” here refers to the case where the parties were unable to comply with the pertinent period despite the parties’ care to do their procedural acts (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2017Da536239, Apr. 12, 2018). The Plaintiff’s service of the original copy and the date of delivery pursuant to the above provision of the Civil Procedure Act.

2.2