1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Determination on the legitimacy of a subsequent appeal

A. The following facts are apparent in the records of this case:

1) On July 10, 2007, the Plaintiff applied for the payment order against the Defendant and the co-defendants of the first instance court for the payment order as stated in the purport of the claim. On July 12, 2007, the above court served the original copy of the above payment order and the notification procedure guidance at the Defendant’s domicile. On July 18, 2007, the Defendant’s child E, who was living together at the Defendant’s domicile, received the above original of the payment order on July 24, 2007, submitted a written objection against the above payment order to the above court on July 24, 2007, and the above payment order was implemented as litigation procedure under Daegu District Court Decision 2007Da252316.

3) On October 4, 2007, the court of first instance served a notice of the first date for pleading on the Defendant on the date of pleading, but did not serve on the Defendant due to the absence of closure, and served the notice of the date for pleading on October 15, 2007, and served the Defendant by means of delivery of the notice of the date for pleading and the certificate of the Plaintiff’s submission, brief, and the notice of the date for pleading on October 15, 2007. The court of first instance served each of the following documents on the Defendant’s domicile, but did not serve on the Defendant due to the absence of closure. (4) The court of first instance declared a ruling accepting the Plaintiff’s claim on April 16, 2008, and served the original copy of the judgment on May 20, 2008, which was served on the Defendant’s domicile, but did not serve on the Defendant by public notice, and the said service by publication became effective at the time of June 40, 2008.

5) The Defendant filed a subsequent appeal with the court of first instance on October 17, 2018, which had the effect of the above service by public notice and the period of appeal of two weeks elapsed thereafter. (B) As long as the original copy of the judgment was served by public notice by public notice by order of the presiding judge, the service becomes effective by law, even if the requirements are not satisfied.