1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

B. The plaintiff.

1. According to the records on the legitimacy of the appeal for subsequent completion, the court of first instance rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff on June 9, 2003 after serving a copy of the complaint against the network E and a notice of the date for pleading by public notice, and served the original copy of the judgment on June 16, 2003 on the network E by public notice. The Defendants, the deceased E’s heir, filed the appeal for subsequent completion on September 3, 2014, after being aware of the fact that the instant judgment was rendered in the pertinent lawsuit on September 3, 2014, the fact that the Defendants, the deceased E’s heir, filed the appeal for subsequent completion on September 16, 2014, respectively.

Thus, the defendants could not observe the appeal period due to reasons not attributable to them. Thus, the defendants' appeal of this case is legitimate.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of arguments as to Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 2 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 to Eul evidence Nos. 2 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 to the deceased E; on Mar. 17, 1997, on a loan of KRW 170,000 (hereinafter "the first loan"); on July 7, 1997, general loan of KRW 8 million (hereinafter "the second loan"); on the first loan, the deceased E lost profits on Jun. 30, 1998 for the first loan of KRW 1; on March 29, 1998; on the second loan of KRW 1 to the heir No. 1 to the plaintiff on Jan. 15, 2003, the balance of the first loan of KRW 1,724,829; on the other hand, KRW 686,500,000 (the second loan); on the other hand, the heir's 1 to 2016.