이해의 대립 내지 상반된 이해관계가 있는 사람에게의 보충송달의 효력 - 대법원 2016. 11. 10. 선고 2014다54366 판결 -

초록

In a suit for collection against a third party obligor, the competent court served a duplicate of the complaint, the original copy of its decision and the like on the defendant (debtor) at its principal place of business. A clerk of the defendant received those litigation documents at the place above, but did not deliver them to its CEO. Regarding this case, Supreme Court Decision No. 2014 Da 54366 rendered on November 10, 2016 holds that the effect of substituted service is not acknowledged if the principal and its clerk (agent for service) have conflicting or divergent interests. The ruling specifically states that the court’s substituted service of the litigation documents and the original copy of its decision is unlawful, thereby precluding a period for filing an appeal. This constitutes the first judicial precedent in Korea on the effect of substituted service, which, as a leading case, is expected to greatly affect practical legal affairs.

키워드