Supplementary service in the absence of a person to receive service

Service on a married couple who is the living together of the defendant at the domicile of the defendant is effective as a lawful service, because it has not been actually delivered.

Articles 172 and 160 of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 78Da1964 delivered on November 28, 1978

Kim Young-young

Maximum public heat

Sung-dong Branch of Seoul District Court (77Gahap443 delivered on July 1, 200)

The appeal shall be dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

피고는 원고에게 성남시 태평동 6509단지 지상 세멘벽돌조 스라브즙 2층건 주택 및 사무실 1동 1층 주택 11평 7홉 2작 사무실 7평 9홉 4작, 2층 주택 11평 7홉 2작 사무실 7평 9홉 4작, 세멘부록조 스레트즙 평가건 작업장 1동 건평 38평 1홉 7작중 별짇도면표시 2층 주택 11평 7홉 2작을 명도하라.

The judgment that the lawsuit costs shall be borne by the defendant and provisional execution declaration

The plaintiff's claim is revoked and dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be assessed against the plaintiff through the first and second trials.

First of all, the original copy of the judgment of the court of first instance in this case was served on the non-party to the family who was living together with the defendant by mail at the defendant's address on September 7, 1977. Thus, even if the service of the original copy of the judgment was not yet delivered to the defendant, it takes effect as a lawful service, and it is obvious that the defendant filed an appeal against the original judgment of this case on April 11, 1978, because it is obvious that the original copy of the judgment of the court of first instance in this case was illegal after the lapse of the period of appeal.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judge Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Judge)