1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

We examine the legitimacy of a subsequent appeal.

On November 27, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an order for payment with the Seoul Central District Court (Seoul Central District Court 2013Da243837) to issue a payment order and served the original copy of the payment order on January 2, 2014. The Defendant filed an objection against the above payment order on January 7, 2014 and served as a claim for transfer payment with the court of first instance for the first instance. The court of first instance concluded the pleadings on May 23, 2014 and rendered a judgment on May 23, 2014 after serving the notice on the date for pleading on the Defendant by delivery to the person who is not served with the notice on the date for pleading; the original copy of the judgment against the Defendant was served by service by publication on August 26, 2014; and the Defendant filed an appeal to the court of first instance with the court of first instance on July 28, 2015 when the 11-month amount elapsed.

As above, as long as the defendant had been served with the original copy of the payment order and raised an objection, he is obliged to investigate the progress of the lawsuit as he knows that the lawsuit in this case was brought, and even if the defendant had known that the judgment of loss was pronounced, it was due to the defendant's negligence. Thus, the defendant's appeal for subsequent completion of the litigation under Article 173 of the Civil Procedure Act is unlawful because it does not meet

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed.