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. Judgment on the plaintiff's main defense

A. On August 31, 2007, the purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to unfold the provisional seizure applied by the Plaintiff. Since the Plaintiff’s employee visited the Defendant on February 27, 2008 and urged repayment, the Defendant was aware of the fact that the first instance judgment was rendered at the latest around that time.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal, which had been filed more than the two weeks, is unlawful.

B. Determination 1) An appeal shall be filed within two weeks from the date on which the judgment was served (main sentence of Article 396(1) of the Civil Procedure Act). In a case where the parties are unable to comply with the peremptory period due to any cause not attributable to them, the procedural acts may be supplemented within two weeks from the date on which such cause ceases to exist (Article 173(1) of the same Act). In this case, the term “when the cause ceases to exist” means the time when the Defendant becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice, rather than the time when the fact that the judgment was served by public notice was served by public notice (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da20410, Oct. 24, 1997). Meanwhile, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant was unable to be served without fault, and in such a case, the Defendant may seek reimbursement against the Defendant within two weeks from the date on which the cause was served by public notice due to a cause not attributable to him/her (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 20100Da14, May 214, 2014, 2014, etc.).