1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

3...

1. On July 17, 2014, the court of first instance rendered a favorable judgment against the Defendant on the lawfulness of the subsequent appeal by serving a copy of the complaint, notification of the date of pleading, etc. on the Defendant by public notice, and rendered a favorable judgment against the Plaintiff, and also served the original copy of the judgment to the Defendant by public notice.

Therefore, the defendant was unable to comply with the peremptory period due to the reason that the defendant could not be held liable because he was unaware of the delivery of the judgment without negligence.

I would like to say.

According to the records, the judgment of the first instance court was rendered only when the defendant applied for perusal and duplication of the records of trial on April 28, 2016.

The appeal filed by the defendant on May 4, 2016, which was within 14 days from the above, is lawful as satisfying the requirements for subsequent completion of procedural acts.

2. The plaintiff's ground of claim and the defendant's defense

A. On January 1, 1998, the Plaintiff, which caused the Plaintiff’s claim, lent KRW 38,900,000 to the co-defendant B of the first instance trial around 1998 (the Director’s 2009 appears to be a clerical error).

As a security, on April 29, 1998, Defendant B and D issued and delivered to the Plaintiff a promissory note on August 30, 1998 (hereinafter “instant promissory note”) at par value of KRW 35,890,000, and the payment date of KRW 30,000.

Therefore, the Defendants are liable to pay a promissory note jointly with the issuer of the Promissory Notes in this case.

B. The Defendant’s defense of this case was extinguished by the extinctive prescription.

The defendant was declared bankrupt on January 22, 2008 and was granted immunity on April 18, 2008. The plaintiff's claim of this case against the defendant also has the effect of immunity immunity.

3. According to the evidence evidence Nos. 2 and 3, the payment date of the Promissory Notes in this case is August 30, 1998, and the Plaintiff applied for a payment order against the Defendant on September 9, 2013, which had been more than three years thereafter, and then filed the lawsuit in this case on January 16, 2014 after the withdrawal.