logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.10.22 2020나1322
토지인도 등
Text

An appeal by the appellant shall be dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the appellant.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

Reasons

Facts of recognition

A. On August 14, 2018, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant D (hereinafter referred to as “D”) at the first instance court, who is the owner of the instant land, and the owner of the instant land (hereinafter referred to as the “instant land”) that was installed in the area of 220 square meters (hereinafter referred to as the “section”) indicated in the claim of the instant land among the instant land, and installed in the area of 150 square meters in the said area located in the said vinyl, and the instant lawsuit seeking the removal of the instant land and the delivery of the portion (B).

The Plaintiff entered D’s address in the complaint as “Tcheon-si M” (hereinafter “instant address”).

B. On January 15, 2019, the duplicate, etc. of the instant complaint was served to N, a person living together with D, at the domicile of the instant case, and D, as seen above, did not submit any documents, such as the reply, even though the duplicate, etc. of the instant complaint was served.

C. On May 24, 2019, the first instance court sent a notice of the date of pleading to D as the domicile of this case, but was not served due to the absence of closure, and sent the notice of the date of pleading as of June 5, 2019.

On June 14, 2019, the first instance court closed the pleading and rendered a favorable judgment of the Plaintiff on June 28, 2019. The original judgment sent to D the original copy to D as the domicile of the instant case, but is not served due to the absence of closure, service by public notice on July 10, 2019 and became effective at the time of July 25, 2019.

E. On March 26, 2020, the appellant submitted a subsequent petition of appeal as a successor to D on March 26, 2020 on the ground that he succeeded to the duty to remove the instant ground object through D’sO and the duty to deliver the portion of (B).

2. Whether the appeal of this case is lawful

(a) A party that has received a disadvantageous judgment in the first instance trial proceedings shall, in principle, be eligible to appeal and a successor to the party.

arrow