1. The instant lawsuit was concluded on October 5, 2015 as deeming the withdrawal of the Defendant’s appeal.

2. After filing an application for designation of the date.

1. The following facts in fact of recognition are significant or obvious in records to this court:

On January 16, 2015, the first instance court rendered a judgment that fully accepts the plaintiff's claim on January 16, 2015, and the defendant appealed against the judgment of the first instance court on January 29, 2015.

B. On July 17, 2015, the first date for pleading of the instant case was designated as the date for pleading of July 17, 2015, and the Defendant was absent on the first date for pleading of the first date for pleading even after being served on June 23, 2015, and the Plaintiff present at the time was not present at the time.

C. After that, the Defendant served a notice of the second date for pleading, which was designated as the second date for pleading on September 4, 2015, on August 6, 2015, and submitted a letter of delegation of lawsuit on September 1, 2015, but the Defendant and the Defendant’s legal representative were absent at all on the second date for pleading, and the Plaintiff present at the time was not present at that time.

On October 12, 2015, when one month has elapsed from the date of the second pleading, the Defendant filed an application for resumption of pleadings and the statement of grounds for appeal in this Court.

2. During the appellate trial proceeding, both parties were absent or present at the date of pleading on two occasions.

Even if no pleading is made, the appeal shall be deemed to have been withdrawn if no request for fixed date is filed within one month from the date of pleading for the second absence (Article 268(2) and (4) of the Civil Procedure Act). Such deemed withdrawal of an appeal is a legal effect naturally arising due to the fulfillment of the above requirements, and cannot be determined by the court or the parties’ intent. Even if the parties are willing to perform the litigation, such effect cannot be denied, and it shall not be arbitrarily handled in accordance with the court’s discretion or the contents and progress of the litigation case

(See Supreme Court Decision 81Da94 delivered on October 12, 1982). According to the above facts, the defendant was absent on the date of pleading two times even after being notified of lawful date by this court, and the defendant was absent from the second two parties during the above date of pleading.