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. Basic facts

A. On October 16, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application for the instant payment order with the Defendant for the payment of the agreement amounting to KRW 2 million and delay damages related to the liquor supply contract. On October 23, 2018, the original copy of the payment order was served on the Defendant on October 23, 2018, and the Defendant received it.

B. On October 25, 2018, the Defendant submitted a written objection against the above payment order, and the said written objection contains the same address as that of the Defendant’s domicile where the original copy of the above payment order was served (Ulsan Jung-gu C building D).

C. The instant payment order, upon the Defendant’s filing of objection, was implemented as a lawsuit.

The court of first instance served a notice of the date of pleading on the defendant's domicile, but the notice of the date of pleading was not closed, and was served by delivery.

E. The Defendant did not appear on April 16, 2019, which was the first date for pleading of the first instance court, and the court of the first instance declared the first instance judgment after closing pleadings on the same day.

F. On May 3, 2019, the first instance court served an authentic copy of the judgment of the first instance on the Defendant’s domicile but was not served due to the absence of a closed door, and served the authentic copy of the said judgment on May 18, 2019, and became effective as service on May 18, 2019.

G. On June 28, 2019, the Defendant submitted a written appeal for subsequent completion.

[Grounds for recognition] The substantial facts in this Court and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Whether a subsequent appeal is lawful;

A. On November 30, 2018, after the Defendant alleged that he had raised an objection against the instant payment order, the Defendant was unable to serve a notice of the date of pleading sent by the first instance court to the director of Ulsan-gu E and F, and as the date of pleading was not closed after having sent the notice to the incorrect address before the director, it is unlawful to make a decision of service by public notice without making an inquiry about the Defendant’s domicile, etc.

Therefore, the defendant was unable to observe the period of appeal due to a cause not attributable to him, and the defendant was found in the first instance court on June 21, 2019 and received the judgment.