1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Facts of recognition

The following facts may be acknowledged according to the statements in Gap's 3 to 5, and Eul's 1, unless there is a dispute between the parties or according to the statements in Gap's 3 to 5.

On December 1, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the claim of damages against the Defendant under the Lo-gu District Court Goyang Branch 2015Kadan92580, and on December 17, 2015, the Plaintiff revised the Defendant’s address to “Seoul building C and B01” according to the order to rectify the address on December 15, 2015 by the court of first instance on December 17, 2015.

On January 6, 2016, the court of first instance served a copy of the complaint and a guide of lawsuit to the defendant's address as the defendant's address, and on March 1, 2015, D (E) who is the defendant's living together (child) received it.

After that, on April 11, 2016, the court of first instance served a notice of the sentencing date to the defendant's address above, and on April 15, 2016, the defendant received it.

On April 28, 2016, the court of first instance sentenced the first instance judgment under the absence of the defendant, and served the original copy of the judgment on April 29, 2016 to the above address, but it was impossible to serve the original copy due to the absence of closure on May 10, 2016.

On May 16, 2016, the court of first instance rendered a disposition of service by public notice to the defendant on May 16, 2016, and the above service by public notice became effective on May 31, 2016.

On October 24, 2016, the Defendant submitted to the court of first instance a written appeal for the subsequent completion of service at the time the service by public notice became effective.

On May 31, 2016, the Defendant’s first instance court’s assertion as to whether the appeal for subsequent completion is lawful, served by public notice on the Defendant, and became effective on May 31, 2016. However, the Defendant became aware of the fact that the first instance court was sentenced on October 10, 2016.

Therefore, since the defendant could not comply with the appeal period due to reasons not attributable to himself, the appeal of this case is lawful.

Judgment

Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that "any reason for which a party cannot be held liable" can not be observed even though the party has fulfilled generally his/her duty to conduct the procedural acts.