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 is filed against the Defendant on December 15, 2014, and the lawsuit was performed as a result of filing an application for a payment order, and the court of first instance rendered a judgment on March 30, 2015 after serving a copy, etc. of the complaint to the Defendant by means of service by public notice. The fact that the original copy of the judgment was served on the Defendant on April 8, 2015 by means of service by public notice is apparent in the record.

In addition, according to the purport of the entire pleadings, the defendant seems to have become aware of the existence of the judgment of the first instance court around August 2019. Thus, the defendant filed an appeal of the instant case on August 12, 2019, where the first instance court became aware that it was unable to observe the peremptory appeal period due to the failure to know the progress and result thereof, etc. of the instant lawsuit due to a cause not attributable to himself/herself, and that the judgment of the first instance court was served by service by public notice.

The appeal of this case is lawful.

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. On October 26, 2005, the Plaintiff-Appellant lent the term of validity to the Defendant at five years, the loan interest rate of 5.48% per month, and the overdue interest rate of 5.50% per month, and transferred the above loan loan to the Plaintiff on November 16, 2012, and the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the transfer of the loan by content-certified mail.

The principal and interest of the instant loan claim is KRW 8,720,619 as of December 10, 2014 (i.e., principal KRW 2,132,95 overdue interest of KRW 6,587,624). As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff, the assignee of the instant loan claim, delay damages for KRW 8,720,619 and the principal amount of KRW 2,132,95.

B. The transferor cannot set up against the obligor unless the obligor notifies the obligor or the obligor approves the assigned claim.

(Article 450 (1) of the Civil Act). According to each of the certificates of Evidence Nos. 1, 1, and 3, on November 16, 2012, the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd. transferred the claims for loans to the Defendant to the Plaintiff, and on November 21, 2012, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the assignment by content-certified mail upon delegation by the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd.