logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.07.06 2017나4449
대여금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. The following facts shall be apparent or clearly recorded in this court:

On March 3, 2017, the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant, and the copy of the complaint was not served to the Defendant’s address recorded in the written complaint.

The first instance court ordered the plaintiff (appointed party) to correct the defendant's address at the time of the defendant, and the plaintiff (Appointed party) revised the defendant's address to "Seoul-dong G building and B No. 417 of Dongyang-gu, Manyang-si" as the resident registration address at the time of the defendant.

The first instance court served a copy of the complaint again to the above address, but it was not served as a closed door, and it was impossible to serve the execution officer again due to the absence of a closed door.

B. However, on May 10, 2017, the Defendant sought this Court, and directly received a copy of the complaint, an application for modification of the purport of the claim, and drafted a receipt stating the same address as that of the above amendment.

C. The first instance court did not submit a written reply within one month from the Defendant, and sent a notice of the pronouncement date of a judgment without pleading to the Defendant, which was not served on the grounds of the absence of closure.

On July 18, 2017, the first instance court served the above notice to the defendant by means of delivery, and rendered a judgment of non-litigation in favor of the plaintiff on July 18, 2017 when the defendant did not appear.

The first instance court served the original judgment to the defendant again to the above address, but it served the original judgment by means of service not served due to the absence of documents, and the service became effective on August 19, 2017.

On October 10, 2017, the Defendant filed an appeal to the instant case by asserting that he failed to observe the period of the appeal due to a cause not attributable to himself.

2. Determination on the legitimacy of a subsequent appeal

A. The phrase “reasons for which a party is not liable” under Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act refers to “reasons for which a party is not liable” shall be generally required for the party to conduct the said procedural acts.

arrow