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 a subsequent appeal is lawful;

A. On November 16, 2016, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant. On the other hand, the first instance court served a duplicate of the complaint on the Defendant’s domicile, “Ycheon-gu D apartment 207 Dong 1001 (hereinafter “the instant apartment”), which is the Defendant’s domicile, on which the Defendant indicated in the written complaint.” Accordingly, the notice of the reason for service is indicated as “the Defendant received a duplicate of the complaint at the Defendant’s domicile on November 28, 2016.” (ii) The first instance court served the Defendant a notice of the date for pronouncement of a judgment without pleading on which it was rendered at the Defendant’s domicile, but was not served on February 1, 2017 due to the director’s unknown address, and sentenced the first instance court judgment on February 3, 2017.

3) On February 22, 2017, the first instance court served the original of the judgment on the Defendant, but did not serve the original of the judgment as a director’s unknown, and served the original of the judgment by public notice, and on March 9, 2017, the service became effective on the Defendant. (4) On March 28, 2017, when the period for appeal was lapsed, the Defendant filed an appeal for subsequent completion with the first instance court on March 28, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. 1) As long as the original copy of the judgment was served by public notice by the order of the presiding judge, even if it does not meet the requirements, the service becomes effective as a legal service, and the above judgment becomes final and conclusive formally due to the intention of the appeal period. The propriety of the appeal to the above judgment ought to be separately determined by whether the failure to observe the appeal period is due to a cause not attributable to the appellant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Da3039, Jul. 27, 2001). Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act refers to “reasons not attributable to the party” under Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, even though the party had paid due attention to conducting procedural acts, the reason why the period cannot be observed.