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. 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 by neglecting it within two weeks from the date such cause ceases to exist.”

However, if a copy, original copy, etc. of a complaint were served by service by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence, and in such a case, the defendant was unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her, and thus the defendant is entitled to file an appeal for subsequent completion within two weeks after such cause ceases to exist

Here, the term “after the cause has ceased” refers to the time when a party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was delivered by public notice, instead of simply knowing the fact that the said judgment was delivered by public notice. Thus, barring any special circumstance, it shall be deemed that a party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice only when the party or legal representative inspected the records of the case or received a new original of the judgment.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Da8005 Decided February 24, 2006 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Da8005). The first instance court rendered a judgment citing the Plaintiff’s claim on October 11, 201 after serving a copy of the complaint against the Defendant, a written guidance for litigation, and a written notice of the date of pleading by public notice, with respect to the Defendant by public notice. The original of the judgment also served on the Defendant on October 21, 201 by means of service by public notice. The fact that the Defendant was issued the original copy of the judgment on December 31, 201, and that the Defendant filed the instant appeal on January 8, 2019 is apparent in the record.

Therefore, around December 31, 2018, the defendant was aware of the fact that the judgment of the first instance court was rendered by means of service by public notice, and the case raised within two weeks thereafter.