1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Whether a subsequent appeal is lawful;

A. If a copy of the complaint of related legal principles and the original copy of the judgment were 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 was 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 for subsequent completion within two weeks after

Here, the term “after the cause has ceased” refers to the time when a party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was rendered by public notice, rather than the time when the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice. Thus, barring any special circumstances, it shall be deemed that the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice only when he/she

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

Judgment

On September 28, 2011, the court of first instance served a notice of complaint and the date of pleading on the Defendant by public notice and declared that the original copy of the judgment was served on the Defendant on October 12, 201 by means of service by public notice, and served on the Defendant on the Defendant on September 12, 201. On January 15, 2019, the Defendant received the original copy of the judgment of the first instance after filing an application for perusal and duplication to this court and became aware of the fact that the judgment of the first instance was made by public notice on January 25, 2019, and submitted an appeal for subsequent completion on January 25, 2019.

According to the above facts, the defendant was unable to observe the peremptory appeal period due to a cause not attributable to the defendant, and filed a subsequent appeal within two weeks from the time the cause ceases to exist. Thus, the subsequent appeal of this case is lawful.

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The purport of the entire pleadings is as follows: Gap evidence No. 1 of the facts of recognition.