(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2018.11.30 2018나38465

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) 서울서부지방법원 2018.11.30 2018나38465

양수금

Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. If a copy of a complaint, an original copy, etc. of the judgment regarding the legitimacy of the appeal of this case 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 observe the peremptory period 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" refers to the time when the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, rather than the time when the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, barring any other special circumstance. Thus, in ordinary cases, it shall be deemed that the party or legal representative becomes aware

(2) According to the records, the court of first instance is recognized on July 2, 2018, with the knowledge of the fact that the record of this case was served by public notice by perusal and reproduction of the records of this case around June 27, 2018, and that the first instance court filed an appeal for subsequent completion on July 2, 2018 with the knowledge of the fact that the records of this case were served by public notice by public notice.

Thus, the appeal of this case was filed within two weeks from the date the defendant knew that the judgment of the court of first instance was served by service by public notice, and is lawful.

2. We examine, ex officio, whether the instant lawsuit is lawful or not, ex officio, as to the determination on the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

Since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of the party has res judicata effect, the party who received the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the party against the other party to the lawsuit.

참조판례

-대법원 2006. 2. 24. 선고 2004다8005 판결

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2019.03.28 2018나3188

-전주지방법원 2020.06.11 2019나8828

-대전고등법원(청주) 2019.11.06 2019나2491

-대구지방법원 2020.12.16 2020나305841

-서울서부지방법원 2020.07.17 2019나36718