logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2015.12.04 2015나56388
양수금
Text

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.

Reasons

1. If the original copy of a complaint and the original copy of the judgment were served by service by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant was not aware of the service of the judgment without negligence, barring any special circumstance. In such a case, the defendant is unable to comply with the peremptory term due to a cause not attributable to the defendant, and thus, the defendant 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 not to the case where the party or legal representative does not know the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, but to the case where the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, barring any special circumstance, when the party or legal representative peruses the records of the case or

(2) The court of first instance rendered a favorable judgment against the Defendant on September 29, 2014 by serving a copy of the complaint and a notice of the date for pleading, etc. on January 10, 2013 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da75044, Jan. 10, 201). As to the instant case, the Defendant’s submission of the instant report to the court of first instance on July 30, 2015 was apparent in the record, and the Defendant could not observe the period of appeal due to any cause not attributable to the Defendant, and the Defendant filed the instant appeal for subsequent completion within two weeks from the date on which the cause ceases to exist. As such, the instant appeal is lawful.

2. According to the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 4 as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant’s loan amount between the new Savings Bank Co., Ltd. on Aug. 14, 2002 and the Comperson Credit Bank Co., Ltd. on the ground of the change of the name.

arrow