logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2020.12.16 2019나69455
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The appeal by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) shall be dismissed;

2. The counterclaim of this case, which was filed in the trial, has been appealed against the principal lawsuit.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the legitimacy of the subsequent appeal of this case

(a) Fact-finding may be found in the following facts, either of which is apparent in the records or which is obvious to this court, and of the overall purport of the pleadings:

1) On April 5, 2017, the Plaintiff filed the instant principal suit against the Defendant. The court of first instance is the Incheon East-gu E Apartment F (hereinafter “instant E Apartment F”) that the Plaintiff entered as the Defendant’s domicile in the main complaint of this case.

) Duplicate, etc. of the main complaint (hereinafter referred to as “duplicate, etc.”)

(2) The first instance court ordered the Plaintiff to correct the address, which is the Defendant’s resident registration address, and the Plaintiff corrected the address to the Dong-gu G Apartment-ho (hereinafter “instant domicile”).

3) On April 24, 2017, the first instance court served a duplicate, etc. of the complaint on the instant domicile on May 14, 2017, and received the duplicate, etc. of the complaint in the capacity of a person living together with the Defendant on May 14, 2017. (4) Following the Defendant’s failure to submit a written response, the first instance court sent the notice of the sentencing date to the Defendant as the instant domicile. The said notice was sent as the absence of closure, and thus, was deemed to be served on August 2, 2017.

5) On August 23, 2017, the first instance court rendered a judgment accepting the Plaintiff’s claim by applying Article 208(3)1 of the Civil Procedure Act, and subsequently served the original of the judgment to the Defendant by means of service on September 15, 2017, when the service of the said original of the judgment was conducted at the domicile of the instant case but it was impossible to serve the said original of the judgment due to the absence of closure. 6) The Defendant was issued the original of the first instance judgment on October 21, 2019, and submitted the instant final appeal to the first instance court on October 23, 2019.

B. According to Article 186(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, if a person on service was not present at a place other than a place of service, such person as a person living together with the mental capability to make reasonable judgment.

arrow