1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Defendants exceeding the money ordered to be paid under the following subparagraphs shall be revoked and above.

1. If a copy of a complaint on the legitimacy of an appeal for subsequent completion and the original copy of the judgment were served by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence. In such a case, the defendant is unable to observe the peremptory term due to a cause not attributable to him/her and thus the defendant is entitled to file an appeal for subsequent completion within two weeks after such cause ceases to exist. Here, the term "after the cause ceases to exist" refers to the time when the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the original judgment was served by public notice, rather than the time when the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice. Thus, barring any special circumstance, 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

(2) According to the records, the court of first instance served a copy, etc. of the complaint of this case on the night basis as “Seoul Gangseo-gu C and 201,” which is the resident registration place of the Defendant A, at night. However, the court of first instance ordered the Defendants to serve a copy, etc. of the complaint of this case on July 19, 2014, around 20:36, July 23, 2014; around 21:05, July 27, 2014; and on July 12:37, 2014, it is impossible to serve the copy, etc. of the complaint of this case on the part of the Defendant B, “Seoul Gangseo-gu D,” which is the resident registration place of this case; however, the court of first instance served on the Defendants at night; on September 20, 2014, ordered the Defendants to serve a service by public notice by public notice; and on September 20, 2014, the court of first instance also ordered the Defendants to serve on the Defendants on the date of pleading 2014.