(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2019.06.20 2018나1333

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2019.06.20 2018나1333

양수금

Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the appeal for subsequent completion is that the Defendant served on June 15, 2017 a written examination of the case on the list of defaulters entered in the title of execution. Around that time, there was any special circumstance that could be identified by the Defendant through the perusal of court records, etc., and at the latest, the Defendant became aware of the fact that the judgment of the first instance was served by public notice on July 10, 2017 when the case was cited.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal filed on May 14, 2018 after the lapse of two or more weeks from them is unlawful.

Judgment

(1) If a copy, original copy, etc. of a complaint was served by service by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence. In such a case, the defendant was unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her and the defendant is entitled to file a subsequent appeal within two weeks (30 days if 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 party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, rather than to the time when the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice. Barring any special circumstance, in ordinary cases, it shall be deemed that the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment

(2) In full view of the entries in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, as well as the overall purport of the facts and arguments in the court of first instance, the court of first instance shall serve the defendant by means of service such as a copy of the complaint by public notice, and shall render a judgment citing the plaintiff's claim on Sept. 26, 2008.

참조판례

-대법원 2006. 2. 24. 선고 2004다8005 판결

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.08.11 2019나40712

-서울서부지방법원 2020.07.02 2019나41178

-청주지방법원 2018.01.25 2016나4533

-서울서부지방법원 2020.06.04 2019나1767

-서울동부지방법원 2020.01.31 2018나29766