[부동산소유권이전등기][공2000.6.15.(108),1289]
[1] In the case where the head of a family is deceased after the death of the married head of the Gu, and there is no male to inherit the head of a family, the head of a family and the heir of property
[2] Whether Article 25 (2) of the Addenda of the Civil Act shall apply in a case where a family head or a property inheritance is not commenced due to the adjudication of disappearance (negative)
[1] According to the custom before the enforcement of the Civil Code, in case where the head of a family dies after the death of the married head of the family and there is no male to inherit the head of the family, the head of the family and the inheritance of the property of the deceased head of the family shall be made up until the adopted children are selected after the order of respect in accordance with the order of respect.
[2] Article 25(2) of the Addenda of the Civil Act provides that the provisions of the Civil Act shall apply to inheritance order, inheritance portion, and other inheritance in cases where the family head or the inheritance of property commences due to an adjudication of disappearance even when the period of disappearance expires during the period of the enforcement of the former Act, if such disappearance is declared after the enforcement of the Civil Act. Thus, the above provision shall not apply unless the inheritance of family head or the property commences
[1] Articles 980 and 100 of the Civil Act / [2] Article 25 (2) of the Addenda to the Civil Act
[1] Supreme Court Decision 79Da720 delivered on June 26, 1979 (Gong1979, 12095), Supreme Court Decision 87Meu13 delivered on September 26, 1989 (Gong1989, 1579), Supreme Court Decision 91Da32350 delivered on November 26, 1991 (Gong192, 296), Supreme Court Decision 92Da7955 delivered on May 22, 1992 (Gong192, 1984) / [2] Supreme Court Decision 80Da351 delivered on August 26, 1980 (Gong1980, 13120)
Plaintiff (Attorney Park Jong-chul, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)
Defendant
Jeonju District Court Decision 98Na6381 delivered on January 14, 2000
The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.
1. According to the custom before the enforcement of the Civil Act, in cases where the head of a family dies after the death of the married head of the family and there is no male to inherit the head of the family, the head of the family and the property of the deceased family shall be inherited until the adopted child is selected after the order of respect expenses (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 79Da720, Jun. 26, 1979; 87Meu13, Sept. 26, 1989).
In addition, Article 25(2) of the Addenda to the Civil Act provides that the provisions of the Civil Act shall apply to inheritance order, inheritance portion and other inheritance in cases where a family head or a property inheritance commences due to an adjudication of disappearance, even when the period of disappearance expires during the period of the enforcement of the former Act, if such disappearance is declared after the enforcement of the Civil Act. Thus, the above provision shall not apply unless the case where the family head or the property
2. As determined by the court below, the facts in this case were established by the non-party 2 and the non-party 3, the wife of whom is the non-party 3 and the non-party 4 and three, the wife of which is the non-party 1, who is the non-party 4 and the female of which are the head, as his wife. The non-party 1 died on September 17, 1956, and the non-party 3 died on April 3, 1939, and the non-party 5, the head of the non-party 3, who is the non-party 3, was declared missing on December 12, 1997, as the period of disappearance expired on October 30, 195, the non-party 1's death, and the non-party 5, the non-party 1, who is the non-party 1's wife, cannot inherit the land in this case from the non-party 1, and the non-party 2, the non-party 1, who was subject to the inheritance.
The decision of the court below to the same purport is justified, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as alleged in the grounds of appeal.
3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition.
Justices Cho Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)