logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2016.05.04 2015나4476
양수금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

Reasons

1. The facts subsequent to the underlying facts are recognized by each entry in Gap evidence 1 to 5 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings, and the records.

A. The first instance court served a copy of the complaint on the Seoul Songpa-gu C02, the Defendant’s domicile, and D, the Defendant’s spouse, received on June 30, 2009.

B. On August 27, 2009, the first instance court served a notice of the date of pleading on the above domicile and received D, which is the spouse of the defendant. On August 27, 2009, when the defendant was absent, the pleading is closed, and the sentencing date was set at 14:00 on September 24, 2009, and was served on the defendant’s domicile, and was not served on the defendant’s notice of the sentencing date due to the reason that the defendant was not “closed,” and the first instance court served the said notice by registered mail on September 8, 2009.

C. On September 24, 2009, the court of first instance rendered a judgment citing all the plaintiff's claims while the defendant was absent. On September 28, 2009, the original judgment was served to the defendant's domicile on September 28, 2009, but the service was not made due to the absence of closure, and the original judgment was served to the defendant on October 12, 2009.

Accordingly, the original judgment was delivered to the defendant on October 27, 2009, and the defendant submitted a written appeal for subsequent completion on June 22, 2015, after the period of appeal expires.

2. A subsequent completion of procedural acts, such as an appeal filed after the lapse of the final appeal period, which is the peremptory period to determine whether the subsequent appeal is lawful, is legitimate only when the parties could not observe the above period due to a cause not attributable to them pursuant to Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act. Thus, we examine ex officio as to the legality of the subsequent appeal of this case.

The 'party' stipulated in article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act.

arrow