1. Upon receiving a claim for a change in exchange from this court, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 24,000,000 and its corresponding amount.

1. If the legality of an appeal for subsequent completion, a copy of a complaint, an original copy of judgment, etc., were served by service by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence, barring any special circumstance. In such a case, the defendant may file an appeal for subsequent completion within two weeks (30 days where the reason ceases to exist in a foreign country at the time when the reason ceases to exist) after the service of the judgment was ceased to exist,

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 any other 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 the original

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da75044 Decided January 10, 2013, etc.). The first instance court rendered a judgment that fully accepts the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant on September 15, 2015 after delivering a duplicate of the complaint of this case and a notice of the date of pleading to the Defendant by public notice, to the Defendant, and subsequently, rendered a judgment that fully accepts the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant on September 15, 2015. The original copy of the judgment also served to the Defendant by public notice, and the fact that the Defendant perused and copied the records of this case on December 17, 2015, and immediately filed an appeal for the subsequent day is apparent in the record.

Therefore, the appeal of this case filed within two weeks from the date the judgment of the court of first instance became aware that the records of this case were perused and copied by the Defendant and served by public notice was lawful appeal that satisfies the requirements for subsequent completion of the litigation, as it was filed within the lawful appeal period.

2. Judgment on the merits

A. The Plaintiff is a creditor who has lent money to C, and C and the Defendant from around 209.