Effect of a protocol of compromise to which the deceased is a party

A protocol of compromise to which the deceased party is a party is null and void.

Article 45 of the Civil Procedure Act

Attorney Kim Yong-sung, Counsel for the legal guardian Kim Jong-sung, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Defendant

Seoul District Court of the first instance, the Seoul High Court of the second instance, 54 civilian 351 delivered on February 4, 1955

We reverse the original judgment.

The case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the plaintiff's plaintiff's ground of appeal is that, if the court below's conclusion is overfinite, the court below's conclusion does not state the deceased non-party 1 as the other party, and even if the defendant's protocol of compromise was not prepared with the Kim Yong-ran, the plaintiff's legal guardian's right to claim the plaintiff's principal lawsuit under the premise that the plaintiff's right to claim is null and void of the protocol of compromise is valid to the plaintiff. Thus, although the plaintiff's right to claim the plaintiff's principal lawsuit under the premise that the plaintiff's right to claim is null and void, it is clear that the date when the legal compromise was formed is set at August 27, 4280, the plaintiff's right to claim against the plaintiff was exercised by Gap, a certified copy of

Therefore, while Kim Yong-ran is not the legal representative of the plaintiff at the time of reconciliation, the fact that Kim Yong-ran becomes the legal guardian of the plaintiff is the case after the death of the non-party 2 of the plaintiff's parental authority on February 5, 4281. Nevertheless, the court below held that even at the time of reconciliation, the court below erred in recognizing the electric reconciliation as valid as a result of the Kim Yong-ran's finding as the plaintiff's guardian at the time of reconciliation.

According to the court records and the original judgment, since the date of preparation of the protocol of conciliation, which was established between the plaintiff 1 and the defendant in the Seoul District Court on the real estate, was a short-term of August 27, 4280 at the Seoul District Court, the plaintiff 1 died as a previous family member on the first day, and as to the plaintiff, who is a miscarriage heir, there was a right of legal representation as a person with parental authority over the plaintiff 10-1 and 2, there was no dispute over the establishment of the right of legal representation as to the first and second of the evidence No. 10-2, and the fact that the plaintiff's guardian was formed as the plaintiff's guardian is not a legal representation right at the time of the establishment of the court settlement and the fact that the plaintiff's guardian was not a person with parental authority over the second day on the second day on the second day on the second day on the second day on the second day on the second day on the second day on the second day on the second day on the second day on the second day on the second day on the last day on the second day on the death.

As above, in order to recognize that the original judgment is to be reversed and to make a decision on this case revised, it is so decided as per Disposition by the application of Article 407(1)(b) of the Civil Procedure Act.

Justices Kim Jong-il (Presiding Justice) Acting Justice Kim Jae-ho on the present allotment of Kim Dong-dong