1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked.

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit.

1. The following facts are revealed in light of the record of No. 2 and the record of the instant case, based on the determination of legality of the appeal for subsequent completion.

In the first instance court, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the payment of the instant loan with the Defendant’s address of Goyang-gu I apartment 105 Dong 305, Goyang-gu, Goyang-gu, and the first instance court served several times at the above location, but all of the documents were not served due to the absence of closure, and the documents related to the lawsuit were served on the Defendant according to the method of service by public notice and the judgment was proceeded on April 13, 2012, and served on the Defendant the certified copy of the judgment on April 16, 2012.

After that, around June 24, 2015, the Defendant filed an application for perusal and duplication of records with the first instance court, and confirmed that the original copy of the first instance judgment was served by means of service by public notice as above, and filed the instant appeal on July 3, 2015.

Therefore, the Defendant could not comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him, and the Defendant filed an appeal to the instant subsequent completion within two weeks from that time, knowing that the first instance judgment was served by public notice on June 24, 2015, and that it was served by public notice. As such, the instant subsequent completion appeal is lawful as it was filed within a lawful period.

2. The parties' assertion

A. On April 6, 2009, the Plaintiff entered into a monetary loan agreement with the co-defendant B and the Defendant on April 6, 2009, and deposited KRW 150 million with the Defendant’s passbook, thereby lending the said money to B and the Defendant.

Since then, B and the defendant did not pay the remaining principal and interest by paying the interest for 7 months, and even if they did not have the ability to repay the plaintiff's money from the beginning, they did not bring money from the plaintiff to the plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant shall be jointly and severally liable to return the loan under the agreement with the plaintiff or to compensate the damage incurred by the illegal act, which shall be 150,000,000 won and interest or delay damages thereon.