The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

1. If a copy of the petition of appeal and the summons of the date of pleading were served by means of service by public notice to the appellee as to the legitimacy of the appeal of this case, and the original copy of the judgment was served by means of service by public notice, the appellee is deemed not aware of the fact that the appellate procedure was in progress, barring special circumstances, and thus, the appellee was not aware of the service of the judgment without negligence. In such a case, the appellee is deemed not capable of complying with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her, and the appellee is able to make an subsequent completion within two weeks (30 days if he/she was in a foreign country at the time when such cause ceases to exist) from the date on which

(2) According to the records, the lower court, on May 14, 2015, delivered to the Defendant a duplicate of the petition of appeal of this case and a writ of summons for the date of pleading by public notice. On December 3, 2014, sentenced the judgment and served the original copy thereof by public notice. On March 11, 2015, when the period for filing an appeal against the lower judgment was expired, the lower court became aware of the fact that the Plaintiff was served with the debtor, M, etc. as the garnishee, and that the Defendant was also aware of the fact that the lower court, on March 11, 2015, filed a collection order under the Seoul Southern District Court 201Ma4238, based on the original copy of the lower judgment’s judgment, and that the Defendant was also aware of the fact that the lower court declared the Defendant on March 14, 2015.

Thus, the defendant's appeal of this case is lawful because it is not possible for the defendant to observe the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him.

2. As seen earlier, the Defendant shall serve a copy of the petition of appeal by public notice.