1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. If a copy of a written complaint for determination as to the legitimacy of an appeal for subsequent completion, and the original of the judgment, etc. were served by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence, and in such a case, the defendant was unable to observe the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to himself/herself and thus, he/she is entitled to file an appeal for subsequent completion within two weeks (30 days if the cause ceases to exist in a foreign country at the

Here, the term “after the cause has ceased” refers to the time when a party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was delivered by public notice, instead of simply knowing the fact that the said judgment was delivered by public notice. Barring any other special circumstances, it shall be deemed that the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice only when the party or legal representative inspected the records of the case or received the original

(See Supreme Court Decision 2015Da8964 Decided June 11, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the first trial against the defendant was conducted by means of service by public notice both from the delivery of a copy of the complaint to the delivery of the original copy of the judgment; ② the service of the original copy of the judgment of the first instance against the defendant was effective from December 2, 2017; ③ the defendant was issued the original copy of the judgment of the first instance on January 24, 2018 and submitted the petition of appeal to the first instance court on January 30, 2018, where two weeks thereafter.

According to the above facts, the defendant failed to observe the period of appeal due to a cause not attributable to him, but filed an appeal for subsequent completion within two weeks from the time such cause ceases to exist. Therefore, the defendant's appeal for subsequent completion is lawful.

2. Judgment on the merits

A. Basic facts 1) The Defendant’s owned Busan Shipping Daegu C 101 Dong 402 (hereinafter “instant officetels”)

(2) a real estate lease business;