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. The facts below the basic facts are either apparent in the records or obvious to this Court.

On July 8, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the payment order under the Daegu District Court Branch No. 2014 tea414.

The above court accepted this and issued a payment order on July 21, 2014, and sent it on two occasions to the defendant's domicile, but did not serve each of them on July 24, 2014 and on August 5, 2014 due to the addressee's unknown whereabouts.

B. In the litigation procedure commenced by the Plaintiff’s petition, the first instance court served the instant complaint on the Defendant’s domicile, but did not serve it on October 5, 2014 as the director’s unknown.

C. On November 26, 2014, the first instance court served the Defendant with the notice of the instant complaint, the date of pleading, etc. by public notice, and subsequently proceeded with pleadings, and rendered a favorable judgment of the Plaintiff on November 26, 2014. The original judgment also served on the Defendant by public notice.

According to the judgment of the court of first instance, the Plaintiff was issued a decision to seize and collect the claim (hereinafter “instant collection order”) against the Defendant’s claim against the Daegu District Court (Seoul District Court), No. 2018TTTB, 314. The instant collection order was served as “Ydong-si D,” the Defendant’s domicile, and the Plaintiff received the instant collection order as the general affairs E on February 26, 2018.

E. On April 30, 2018, the Defendant filed a subsequent appeal against the first instance judgment (hereinafter “instant subsequent appeal”).

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

A. On April 18, 2018, the Defendant asserted that he/she was aware of the fact that there was a judgment of the first instance and the fact that the judgment was served by service by public notice after hearing the same fact from C who was served with the collection order of this case, and was issued with the original copy of the judgment of the first instance on April 18, 2018, and filed an appeal for subsequent completion on April 30, 2018.

Therefore, the defendant could not observe the appeal period, which is a peremptory term, due to reasons not attributable to him.