(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2021.02.17 2019나267

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2021.02.17 2019나267

손해배상(기)

Text

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides, “If a party was unable to comply with the peremptory period due to any cause not attributable to him/her, he/she may supplement the procedural acts in his/her negligence within two weeks from the date on which such cause ceases to exist.”

“The reasons why the party cannot be held liable” here means the reasons why the party could not observe the period even though the party fulfilled its duty of care to conduct the procedural acts.

If the court of first instance delivered a notice to the defendant by means of public notice, barring any special circumstance, it shall be deemed that the defendant was unaware of the service of the judgment without negligence, and if the defendant was sentenced without knowing the fact that the lawsuit was in progress and the defendant became aware of such fact only after the original decision was delivered to the defendant by means of public notice service, barring any special circumstance, it shall be deemed that the failure of the defendant to observe the peremptory period for filing an appeal is due to a cause not attributable to the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da27195, Nov. 10, 2005). According to the records of this case, the court of first instance shall serve the defendant with the notice of a copy of the complaint and the date of pleading as to the defendant by means of public notice and the proceedings for pleadings on Nov. 27, 2018, and then the judgment was delivered to the defendant on Nov. 30, 2018; and the defendant shall also be deemed to have been aware of the fact that the defendant filed the appeal in this case.

Therefore, the Defendant’s appeal for the subsequent completion of the instant case was filed within two weeks from the date on which the Defendant became aware that the judgment of the first instance court was served public notice, and is lawful by satisfying the requirements for subsequent completion of the litigation.

2. Judgment on the merits

(a) the Party’s basic facts 1);

참조판례

-대법원 2005. 11. 10. 선고 2005다27195 판결

유사 판례

-제주지방법원 2020.04.29 2019나10699

-부산지방법원 2020.04.24 2018나42962

-부산고등법원(창원) 2016.12.22 2016나45

-부산지방법원 2020.04.10 2019나4356

-부산지방법원 2020.08.28 2019나50465