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. Determination as to the legitimacy of the subsequent appeal of this case

A. The record reveals the following facts.

1) On June 7, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the instant payment order with Seoul Central District Court Decision 2018Hu113037, Jun. 7, 2018. The Defendant, on June 14, 2018, served the original copy of the instant payment order on “Seoul Gangnam-gu D Buildings and E,” which is one’s domicile, submitted a written objection against the said payment order on June 25, 2018. Accordingly, the instant payment order was implemented as litigation procedures of Seoul Central District Court 2018Da51787, the first instance court of this case, the first instance court of this case. (2) The Defendant filed a written objection against the said payment order and filed a report to “Yok-gu Seoul Central District Court 2018Da51787, Jun. 25, 2018. The first instance court served the notice on the date for pleading on September 6, 2018, but the Defendant was unable to serve the notice on the date for pleading.

9. 19. The notice of the date of pleading was sent to the Defendant by registered mail.

3) On October 1, 2018, the first instance court rendered a favorable judgment against the Plaintiff on October 22, 2018, when the Defendant was absent on the date for the first instance trial, concluded the pleadings. On October 1, 2018, the notice of the sentencing date was served to the service place above. Although the notice of the sentencing date was unable to be served on October 5, 2018 on the grounds of “director unknown”, the first instance court did not take measures such as serving the notice of the sentencing date to the Defendant by means of delivery by registered mail. 4) On October 22, 2018, the first instance court rendered a favorable judgment against the Plaintiff on October 23, 2018, and served the original copy of the said judgment to the service place above on October 23, 2018, and on October 26, 2018, the above judgment also became impossible for the Defendant to serve the original copy by public notice as the service method as a result of service by publication.

Accordingly, the judgment of the court of first instance has passed two weeks from it.