1. The plaintiff's appeal shall be dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. As to the instant lawsuit brought by the Plaintiff against the Defendant, the court of the first instance rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on August 24, 2017, and the original copy of the judgment was served on the Plaintiff on August 31, 2017. The fact that the Plaintiff filed an subsequent appeal against the judgment of the first instance on September 29, 2017, which was the peremptory period, after the lapse of two weeks of appeal period, is apparent in the record.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff's subsequent appeal of this case is lawful, since the plaintiff did not appeal within the appeal period due to not only the Korean language but also the relationship between the significance of the litigation procedure and the progress of the case cannot be grasped.

B. (1) Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, which applies mutatis mutandis to the administrative litigation, provides that “if a party is unable to comply with the peremptory term due to any cause not attributable to him/her, he/she may supplement the litigation by neglecting it within two weeks from the date such cause ceases to exist.” In this context, the term “reasons not attributable to a party” refers to a cause for which the party was unable to comply with the period, even though he/she had paid general attention to conduct the litigation,

(2) According to the records of this case, the plaintiff was present directly on the date of the first instance court's pleading, and was notified of the date of declaration at that date. After the pronouncement of judgment, the plaintiff directly received the original of judgment delivered by the court of first instance by the court of first instance.

In light of the progress of the litigation, even though the Plaintiff is not familiar with the legal system of the Republic of Korea, as alleged by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff was present at the date of pleading, present at the hearing, and was notified of the date of declaration, and the authentic copy of the judgment was received directly by himself.