Whether the validity of a testator can be recognized with the absence of any impediment to the specification of the testator, in case where the testator does not have an address while making a will by means of a written document (negative)

Articles 1060 and 1066 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff (Attorney Na-hee et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Defendant (Attorney Lee Jae-soo et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Seoul High Court Decision 2011Na12127 decided February 2, 2012

The part of the lower judgment against the Defendant is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

Articles 1065 through 1070 of the Civil Act stipulate strictly the method of will to clarify the will of the testator and prevent legal disputes and confusion arising therefrom. Thus, a will contrary to the statutory requirements and methods may not be null and void even if it conforms to the true will of the testator (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 98Da17800, Sept. 3, 1999; 2005Da57899, Mar. 9, 2006). Therefore, a will based on a self-written document has the effect only on the full text, date, address, and name of the testator and affixed his seal pursuant to Article 1066(1) of the Civil Act, and if the testator did not have the domicile, it cannot be denied the validity as a will contrary to the statutory requirements and methods, and it does not affect the testator’s specific intent.

According to the records, although the English address "Seoul Seocho-gu ( Address omitted) ○○ building" is written in the paper of the instant will, it is not the part of the deceased Nonparty, but the full text of the instant will book, the number of the real estate subject to a will is merely indicated in the location and content of each lot number, and it is difficult to view the deceased Nonparty as having self-written his/her address, and there is no other indication that the deceased Nonparty is deemed to have self-written his/her address.

In light of the above facts in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the deceased non-party's will by the will of this case is invalid as it goes against the legal requirements and methods due to omission of his address. Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which partially accepted the plaintiff's claim on the ground that the deceased non-party's will by the will of this case is valid by the will of this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misapprehending the legal principles as to the validity of the will by the certificate

Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the remaining grounds of appeal, the part against the defendant among the judgment below is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the court below for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kwon Soon-il (Presiding Justice)