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. Determination on the legitimacy of a subsequent appeal

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant submitted a written objection and a written answer regarding the decision on performance recommendation to the court of first instance, and thereafter, submitted the written objection and a written answer regarding the decision on performance recommendation, and the original copy of the judgment was merely delivered by service by public notice on the date for pleading and the date for sentencing, etc., with respect to the Defendant. Therefore, if the Defendant had fulfilled generally required care to conduct litigation, he could have known the fact of pronouncement and service of the judgment of the first instance court if he did not perform the litigation, and such circumstance was merely a failure to observe the peremptory term due to the Defendant’s failure to investigate the situation of litigation, and thus, it cannot be said that the appeal of this case is unlawful. 2) The Defendant’s assertion was not present due to the Defendant’s failure to receive the notice on the date for pleading and the date for sentencing delivered by the court of first instance due to the relation at work, and the original copy of the judgment was also not known due to service by public notice

Therefore, since the defendant was negligent due to a cause not attributable to the defendant, which failed to observe the period of appeal due to the failure to know the pronouncement and service of the judgment of the court of first instance, the appeal of subsequent completion is lawful.

B. 1) As long as the original copy of the judgment in the first instance is delivered to the defendant by means of service by public notice, the service is effective even if it is not satisfied, so the judgment in the first instance becomes formally final and conclusive due to the lapse of the appeal period, and the legitimacy of the defendant's subsequent appeal is determined separately by whether the defendant's failure to observe the appeal period is due to a cause not attributable to the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Da3039, Jul. 27, 2001). In addition, the "party" as provided in Article 173 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act cannot be held liable.