1. The defendant's appeal and the plaintiff's successor's application for intervention are all dismissed.

2. Costs of lawsuit after an appeal is filed.

1. The following facts may be acknowledged in light of the following facts: there is no dispute between the parties; it is apparent in the records; or the whole purport of the arguments in Gap evidence 1 and 2:

On December 3, 2009, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant, and the Defendant was not served with a certified copy of the decision on performance recommendation, and on January 14, 2010, the court of first instance decided to serve the Defendant on the method of service by public notice.

B. On February 3, 2010, the court of first instance sentenced the first instance judgment ordering the payment of the acquisition money claim equivalent to the amount stated in the purport of the claim (hereinafter “instant claim”) on the same day after the date when the Defendant was absent, and served the original copy of the judgment by public notice on March 9, 2010. Accordingly, the judgment of the first instance judgment on March 24, 2010 became final and conclusive formally.

C. On June 21, 2013, the Plaintiff transferred the instant claim to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “ Intervenor”). On June 23, 2014, the Intervenor was delegated with the authority to notify the Plaintiff and notified the Defendant of the assignment of the said claim.

On June 30, 2017, the Defendant filed an appeal to complete the instant case. On October 17, 2017, the Intervenor filed an application to resume the legal proceedings on the ground that he/she is the assignee of the instant claim.

2. Determination on the legitimacy of a subsequent appeal

A. Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that "if a party is unable to comply with the peremptory period due to any cause not attributable to him/her, he/she may supplement the procedural acts in his/her negligence within two weeks from the date on which such cause ceases to exist." Here, "reasons not attributable to the party" refers to the time when the defendant is not simply aware of the fact that the judgment was rendered, but the fact that the judgment was served by service by public notice was delivered by public notice. In ordinary cases, the defendant's records