logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2019.04.16 2018나37763
위자료
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was served with a copy, etc. of the complaint during the trial of the first instance, and thereafter, the original copy of the judgment of the first instance was served by means of service by public notice on the date for pleading and the date for sentencing, etc. against the Defendant. Thus, if the Defendant fulfilled his duty of care to conduct litigation, he did not investigate the progress of the lawsuit even though he could have known of the fact of the pronouncement and service of the judgment of the first instance, and thus failed to comply with the peremptory period. Thus, the appeal of this case cannot be deemed to have been filed on account of a cause not attributable to

B. Although the Defendant’s summary of the Defendant’s assertion was served with a duplicate, etc. of the instant complaint on September 10, 2017, the Defendant is a Chinese citizen who acquired Korean nationality around 1996 and was able to read and use the basic reading due to his/her well-known knowledge in Korean, and the domestic judicial system was well-known.

In addition, since the so-called Bosing crime was committed on January 2016 and was damaged by the fraud of KRW 27,50,000,000, the government offices, etc. subsequently, the government offices, etc. did not respond to the so-called Bosing crime.

Accordingly, the defendant did not know the fact that the lawsuit of this case is in progress because he did not open an envelope even when he was served with a duplicate of the complaint of this case, and the original copy of the judgment of the court of first instance was also served by service by public notice. The defendant did not know that the period of appeal was not complied with due to a cause not attributable to the defendant. Thus, the appeal of this case is lawful.

2. Determination

(a)The following facts of recognition are apparent in, or obvious to, the record:

1 The Plaintiff’s name on February 15, 2017 is “C” and the Defendant’s name.

arrow