1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Whether a subsequent appeal is lawful;

A. As long as the original copy of the judgment of the first instance court was served on the defendant by a service by public notice, the requirements are not satisfied.

Even if the service is valid, the judgment of the court of first instance becomes formally final and conclusive due to the limit of the appeal period, and the legitimacy of the defendant's subsequent appeal is determined separately by whether the defendant's failure to observe the appeal period is due to a cause not attributable to the defendant.

(2) Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “A party shall be held liable for any cause not attributable to the party” (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Da30339, Jul. 27, 2001). In addition, “a cause not attributable to the party” under Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act refers to a cause for not complying with the period despite the party’s due care to perform the said procedural acts. In a case where the service of litigation documents in the course of a lawsuit is impossible and the service by public notice is inevitable as a result of the impossibility of being served by public notice, it is different from that by public notice from that in the course of the lawsuit by public notice from the beginning, and thus, the party is obliged to investigate the progress of the lawsuit. Thus, if the party did not know of the progress of the lawsuit at the court, it shall not

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Da3844 Decided March 10, 2006, etc.). B.

Facts of recognition

The following facts are clear in the records or obvious in this court:

1) On April 25, 2016, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant claiming the return of the down payment and the intermediate payment. 2) On July 29, 2016, the court of first instance sent the duplicate of the instant complaint, the litigation guide, and the written application for the correction of the indication of the parties to the Defendant by means of delivering the legal details to the Defendant, and on August 4, 2016, the Defendant’s spouse C received them.

Then, the first instance court.