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 following facts of recognition shall be apparent in the records or significant to this Court:

On July 21, 2017, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant. On October 27, 2017, the Defendant was served with a duplicate of the instant complaint in Ansan-gu, Ansan-gu, the Defendant’s domicile.

B. The court of first instance served a written notice of the date of pleading on the Defendant’s domicile, but served the said document by means of delivery to a person who is not served due to the absence of a closed door, which was sent on November 16, 2017.

In addition, on December 19, 2017, the court of first instance served the original copy of the judgment of this case as the defendant's domicile, but was not served due to the absence of closure.

C. From January 3, 2018 to February 24, 2018, the Defendant submitted a written appeal for the subsequent completion of the judgment of the first instance on April 24, 2018, which was the second week from January 3, 2018.

2. Determination on the legitimacy of a subsequent appeal

A. Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides, “Any reason for which a party is not liable” refers to the reason why the party could not comply with the period even though the party fulfilled generally required care for conducting procedural acts. In a case where documents of lawsuit cannot be served by means of ordinary means during the process of litigation and served by public notice, the party is obligated to investigate the progress of the lawsuit by public notice from the first delivery of a copy of the complaint to the case where the lawsuit was served by public notice. As such, if the party fails to investigate the progress of the lawsuit and fails to comply with the peremptory period, it cannot be deemed that the party is attributable to any reason for which it cannot be held responsible.

(Supreme Court Decision 2012Da44730 Decided October 11, 2012). B.

Judgment

As recognized earlier, the defendant received the copy of the complaint of this case by means of ordinary method, not by public notice.