1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Whether the appeal subsequent to the completion of this case is lawful

(a) The following facts in fact of recognition are known in the records or are obvious to this court:

1) At the time of June 9, 2008, a duplicate of the complaint of this case submitted by the plaintiffs to the court of first instance was served to Gwangju City V, which is the defendant's domicile, and received it by the defendant himself. 2) The court of first instance (the court of first instance) designated the defendant and the co-defendants of the first instance on September 2, 2008 as the date for rendering a judgment without pleading and served the notice of the sentencing date on the defendant's domicile as the date for rendering a judgment without pleading, but the notice was served on the defendant's domicile, but it was impossible to serve on the defendant on August 29, 2008, and was served on September 1, 2008.

3) Co-defendants of the first instance court, except the Defendant, submitted a written response on August 28, 2008, and accordingly, the court of first instance revoked all the date for the pronouncement of the above non-contentious pleadings against the Defendant and co-defendants of the first instance court, and the first instance trial proceedings were in progress. After which, on March 18, 2009, the written statement submitted by the Plaintiffs on March 18, 2009 and the written request for the party’s personal examination against the Defendant was served on the Defendant’s above domicile on March 24, 2009, and received it by the Defendant himself. 4) The court of first instance was absent on April 14, 2009, and the Defendant was absent on the date for pleading on May 10, 2009 and served on the Defendant’s domicile as the date for pleading on May 12, 1009.

On April 20, 2009, the above notice was served on the defendant's domicile and received it by the defendant himself.

5) On May 12, 2009, the Defendant was absent at the same time on the date for pleading, and the court of first instance designated May 26, 2009 as the sentencing date on May 26, 2009 and served a notice of sentencing on the Defendant’s domicile as the sentencing date, but became impossible due to lack of text. 6) On May 26, 2009, the court of first instance sentenced the Defendant to the entire winning judgment against the Defendant while the Defendant did not appear, and served the original copy on the Defendant’s domicile.