(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2020.01.15 2019나28012

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2020.01.15 2019나28012

기타(금전)

Text

1. The defendants' appeal shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Determination on the legitimacy of a subsequent appeal

A. The Plaintiff, while being served with a complaint and being aware of the commencement of the lawsuit, was forced to serve the complaint by public notice during the process of the lawsuit, and thus, was obligated to investigate the progress of the lawsuit, and thus, cannot be deemed to constitute a case where the period of appeal cannot be observed due to a cause not attributable to the Defendants. Thus, the Plaintiff’s appeal to the Defendants’ subsequent appeal is unlawful.

B. According to Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, where a party was unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her, he/she may subsequently complete the procedural acts within two weeks from the date on which such cause ceases to exist. The phrase "reasons not attributable to him/her" under the said Article refers to the grounds why the party could not comply with the period even though he/she exercised generally required care to conduct the procedural acts. In cases where the document of lawsuit is unable to be served by means of service, while the document of lawsuit was being served lawfully by service by public notice, while the document of lawsuit is being served by public notice due to a cause not attributable to him/her due to a cause not attributable to him/her, and where the document of lawsuit cannot be served by public notice from the date on which the delivery of the copy of the complaint was being served by public notice, the party is obligated to investigate the progress of the lawsuit. Thus, if the party fails to comply with the peremptory period due to a failure to investigate the progress of the lawsuit, it cannot be deemed that the party is due to a subsequent completion of appeal.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da44730, Oct. 11, 2012). Meanwhile, the service of documents in civil procedure is served on a person’s domicile, residence, or office.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제173조 제1항

참조판례

-대법원 2012. 10. 11. 선고 2012다44730 판결

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2020.01.15 2019나28012

-부산지방법원 2019.12.18 2019나3483

-부산지방법원 2021.03.31 2020나3113

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.10.23 2019나72955

-의정부지방법원 2017.07.12 2016나62645