1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. If a copy of a complaint of determination as to the legitimacy of a subsequent appeal and the original copy of the judgment were served by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence. In such a case, the defendant is unable to comply with the peremptory term due to a cause not attributable to him/her and thus, he/she is entitled to file an appeal for subsequent completion within two weeks after such cause ceases to exist. "after the cause ceases to exist." "after the cause ceases to exist." "after the cause ceases to exist" refers to the time either the party or legal representative was not simply aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, and further, the fact that the judgment was served by public notice is known only when the party or legal representative inspected the records of the case, or when the original copy

(2) According to the records of the instant case, the court of first instance rendered a judgment citing the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant on June 13, 2017 after serving the Defendant with a copy of the complaint and the notice of the date for pleading by public notice, and proceeding with pleadings, and then serving the original copy of the judgment to the Defendant by public notice. The Defendant filed an appeal for subsequent completion with the court of first instance on August 17, 2017, and on the same day after receiving the original copy of the judgment of the first instance on August 17, 2017.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant could not be able to observe the period of appeal, which is a peremptory term, due to the defendant's failure to know the progress and result of the lawsuit of this case due to a cause not attributable to himself/herself as a result of service by public notice. Thus, the appeal of this case filed within two weeks from August 17, 2017, when the court of first instance became aware of the fact that the defendant was sentenced by public notice by public notice, which was filed by the defendant.