logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2018.05.17 2017나39632
대여금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. The facts under the following basic facts are remarkable or obvious in records to this court:

On September 29, 2016, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit seeking a loan of three million won and damages for delay against the Defendant.

B. On October 26, 2016, the first instance court served a certified copy of the decision on performance recommendation and a written guidance for litigation as “Seoul Seongbuk-gu D (hereinafter “C”) at the Defendant’s domicile,” which is the Defendant’s domicile.

On November 1, 2016, the Defendant received directly a certified copy of the above decision of performance recommendation and a litigation guide at the address of this case, and submitted a written objection to the first instance court on November 9, 2016.

C. Accordingly, the first instance court sent a notice of the date of first pleading (on December 21, 2016) to the Defendant as the address of the instant case, but was not served as a closed door, and accordingly, sent the notice of the date of first pleading on December 6, 2016, and the Defendant was absent on the date of first pleading.

The first instance court served a notice of the date of the second pleading on January 18, 2017 (14:30 on the date of the second pleading) to the Defendant, but was not served as a closed door, and subsequently served a notice of the second pleading on January 4, 2017, and concluded the pleading after the Defendant was absent.

The first instance court served a notice on the date of sentencing ( February 8, 2017) on the Defendant as the domicile of this case, but also is not served as a closed door absence, and subsequently served a notice on the date of sentencing on February 2, 2017, and subsequently declared a judgment that fully accepts the Plaintiff’s claim on February 8, 2017.

E. The first instance court served the Defendant with the original copy of the judgment of the first instance on the domicile of the instant case, but was not served as a closed door absence, and on February 28, 2017, served the original copy of the judgment of the first instance on the method of service by public notice, and became effective at March 15, 2017.

F. The Defendant shall reach the date of November 10, 2017, after 14 days from the date of arrival of the original judgment of the first instance.

arrow