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. Whether a subsequent appeal is lawful;

A. If a copy of the complaint of related legal principles and the original copy of the judgment were served by service by public notice, barring any special circumstance, the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence, and in such a case, the defendant was unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her and thus, he/she may file an appeal for subsequent appeal within two weeks after such cause ceases to exist.

Here, the term “after the cause has ceased” refers to the time when a party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was rendered by means of service by public notice, rather than the time when the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice. Barring any special circumstances, barring special circumstances, it shall be deemed that the party or legal representative becomes aware of the fact that the judgment was served by public notice only when the party or legal representative inspected the

B. (See Supreme Court Decision 2004Da8005 delivered on February 24, 2006).

Facts of recognition

1) On March 14, 2016, the court of first instance served the Defendant a notice of the complaint and the guide of lawsuit on the date of pleading on June 3, 2016, respectively, by means of service by public notice, and on June 21, 2016, it concluded the pleadings without the Defendant’s attendance and rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff on the same day. On the same day, the court of first instance served the Defendant by means of service by public notice on June 27, 2016. Meanwhile, on August 18, 2016, the Defendant applied for perusal and duplication of the instant litigation records to the court of first instance, and perused and copied the instant litigation records on the same day.

3) On October 26, 2016, the Defendant submitted the instant written appeal for the subsequent completion on the instant date. 4) The Seoul Eastern District Court C (Seoul Eastern District Court), which the Plaintiff filed for a judgment of the first instance court, on the real estate owned by the Defendant, as the executive title, reached the Defendant on September 13, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 3, and