1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

3. The decision of the court of first instance is subject to Paragraph 1.

1. Whether a subsequent appeal is lawful;

A. If a copy, original copy, etc. of a complaint was served by service by public notice, barring special circumstances, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence, and in such a case, the defendant is unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her and thus, he/she is entitled to file an appeal to correct it within two weeks after such cause ceases to exist.

The term "after the cause has ceased to exist" 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 judgment was delivered by public notice. Thus, barring any other special circumstances, it should be deemed that the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was delivered by public notice only when he/she read the records of the case or received

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da75044, 75051, Jan. 10, 2013). (B)

According to the records of this case, the court of first instance may recognize the fact that the defendant sent a notice of the date of pleading to the defendant by public notice and the notice of the date of pleading by public notice, and then declared a judgment accepting the plaintiff's claim on December 15, 2016, and that the original copy of the judgment was also sent to the defendant by public notice, and the defendant made a subsequent appeal to the court of first instance on January 19, 2017 after inspecting the records of this case and being issued the original copy of the judgment of the first instance on January 23, 2017.

According to the above facts, the defendant could not be able to observe the appeal period, which is a peremptory period, because he was unable to know the progress and result, etc. of the instant lawsuit due to a cause not attributable to himself, by serving the copy, original copy, etc. of the complaint of this case by public notice. Thus, the appeal of this case filed by the defendant within two weeks from January 19, 2017, which was perused by the records of this case, is lawful by satisfying the requirements for subsequent completion of the litigation

2...