The meaning of the main text under the Civil Act and Family Register Act

The main point of the Civil Code and the Family Register Act is to indicate a specific place that is the intention of the Si, and the choice that the appellant of this case requests to establish a new place is merely the name used before the appellant opens the name in the present name, and it is inappropriate to permit it as the main part of the appellant, since the appellant is not to display his attitude or growth designation.

Article 781(3) of the Civil Act, Article 120 of the Family Register Act

Appellant

Seoul Family Court (No. 83No. 2541)

The appeal is dismissed.

The gist of the reason for the appeal of this case is that the appellant was born between men and women whose name and origin are unknown on October 18, 1948 and all other personal information are born between the appellant and his wife, and the non-appellant 1 took care of his wife, and the non-appellant 1 took care of his husband and wife at his mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's father's mother's mother's father's mother's father's mother's mother's father's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's father's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother's mother.

In this case, the appellant's choice that the appellant applied to take the part of the family register (record 9) on June 23, 1981 is merely a name used before the correction under the current name, and it is not an indication of the appellant's attitude or growth designation, and it is inappropriate to permit the appellant as the main part of the appellant, because the appellant's choice is merely a name used before the correction under the current name, and it is not an indication of the appellant's attitude or growth designation.

Therefore, the appeal of this case is dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Park Jong-dae (Presiding Judge) (Presiding Justice)