1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

purport 1.1.

1. Whether a subsequent appeal is lawful;

A. Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act of the relevant legal principles refers to "reasons for which a party cannot be held liable" refers to the reasons why the party could not observe the period even though he/she has exercised a general duty to do the procedural acts, and in cases where the service of documents related to a lawsuit in the course of a lawsuit was impossible and the service of documents related to the lawsuit was made in a method of service by public notice is inevitable as a result, the party has a duty to investigate the progress of the lawsuit by public notice from the beginning. Thus, if the parties did not know the progress of the lawsuit before the court, it cannot be said that there is no negligence. In addition, such obligation is borne, regardless of whether the party was present at the date for pleading and present at the date for pleading, whether the party was notified of the date for pleading following the date

(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Da16082 Decided July 22, 2004; Supreme Court Decision 97Da50152 Decided October 2, 1998; Supreme Court Decision 86Da2224 Decided March 10, 198; and Supreme Court Decision 86Da2224 Decided March 10, 198; etc.). Moreover, the circumstance that there was no negligence in failing to observe the period of appeal due to the failure to know the pronouncement and service of the judgment, shall be asserted and proved by the party who intends to subsequently supplement the appeal.

(Supreme Court Decision 2012Da44730 Decided October 11, 2012). B.

Judgment

According to the records of this case, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant at the court of first instance on March 13, 2015, and the court of first instance served a duplicate of the complaint on the Defendant, but did not receive it due to the Defendant’s absence of closure. Around June 3, 2015, the execution officer served a duplicate of the complaint on the Defendant’s domicile, stating “on his/her own,” and “Refusal to affix his/her signature or seal,” in the notice on the reason for service,” and thereafter, did not serve the notice on the date of pleading and the notice on the date of change as an abandoned absence.