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.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who engages in the business of installing a heating boiler with the trade name of F. The Defendant is a person who owned the share of 128.02/185.1/185.1 shares in the site among the land and two lots outside 185.1 square meters in Chuncheon City, Macheon-si and its ground buildings (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On July 12, 201, the Defendant agreed to implement the remodeling construction of the instant building (hereinafter “instant construction”). On July 12, 201, the Plaintiff contracted to the Plaintiff for the construction of heating and cooling pipes and water supply and drainage facilities (hereinafter “instant pipeline construction”). On July 22, 2011, the Defendant contracted to the Plaintiff for the purchase and installation of boiler among the instant construction (hereinafter “instant boiler construction”).

C. On September 30, 2012, the Plaintiff completed the boiler construction in both the instant pipeline construction and the instant boiler construction.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, Gap evidence 5, Eul evidence 1-3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. If a copy of a complaint, an original copy, etc. of the judgment were served by service by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant was unaware 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 him/her and thus, he/she is entitled to file a subsequent appeal within two weeks (30 days where the cause ceases to exist in a foreign country at the time the cause ceases to exist) after the cause ceases to exist. Here, the term "after the cause ceases to exist" refers to the time when the parties or legal representatives knew of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, rather than the time when the parties or legal representatives knew of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice. In ordinary cases, barring any special circumstance, the fact that the judgment was served by public notice only when the parties