1. All appeals filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall be dismissed;

2. The costs of appeal shall be principal lawsuit and counterclaim.

1. Determination as to the legitimacy of the subsequent appeal of this case

A. Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act of the relevant legal doctrine refers to a reason why a party is unable to observe the period even though the party fulfilled his/her duty of care to conduct procedural acts. In cases where documents of lawsuit cannot be served by means of ordinary means during the process of litigation and served by public notice, the parties are obliged to investigate the progress of the lawsuit by public notice. Thus, if a party fails to investigate the progress of the lawsuit and fails to comply with the peremptory period due to a failure to investigate the progress of the lawsuit, it cannot be deemed as a cause not attributable to the party. In addition, such obligation is to be borne, regardless of whether the party was present and present at the date for pleading, whether the party was notified of the date for pleading after the date for pleading, or whether the attorney was appointed, regardless of whether or not the party was appointed.

(Supreme Court Decision 2012Da44730 Decided October 11, 2012, and Supreme Court Decision 2014Da211886 Decided October 30, 2014, etc.) B.

However, (1) According to the records of this case, the court of first instance served a notice of change on the date for pleading, etc. on three occasions by serving the defendant on the date for pleading. The defendant presented the counterclaim as of July 18, 2016, and submitted it to the counterclaim as of July 18, 2016. The court of first instance decided to change the date for sentencing scheduled as of September 20, 2016 to October 11, 2016. On September 23, 2016, the defendant’s mother was served with the notice of change of the above date, and the court of first instance partially accepted the plaintiff’s main claim against the defendant on October 11, 2016, and rendered a judgment dismissing the remaining main claim and the defendant’s counterclaim against the plaintiff.