In a case where Party A and Party B filed a claim for confirmation of the absence of a natural father-child relationship between Party B and Party B in order to correct a false family relation register, on the ground that Party A and Party B have a child as a legal father-child, they filed a claim for confirmation of the absence of a natural father-child relationship between Party B and Party B, on the ground that the correction of the family relation register on the said matter is bound to be dealt with pursuant to Article 104 of the Act on the Registration, etc. of Family Relationship, on the ground that Party A and Party B’s claim for confirmation of the absence of a natural father-child relationship relationship between Party B and Party B is unlawful.

In a case where Gap and Eul had a child as a legal father and wife, registered as the second person in the family relation register Gap and Eul by falsely reporting the birth of a deceased soldier to receive additional family allowances, and Gap sought confirmation of the absence of a natural father and wife relationship between Gap and Eul in order to correct the erroneous family relation register since Byung stated as the person Gap and Eul is not de facto dead, the case holding that the matters which are subject to a judgment in the family relation register stipulated in Article 2 of the Family Litigation Act are deemed to have a significant impact on the relative law or inheritance law, and thus, an application for correction of the family relation register can only be filed pursuant to the final judgment pursuant to Article 107 of the Family Litigation Act (hereinafter “Act”), and the correction of the family relation register which cannot be judged pursuant to Article 2 of the Family Litigation Act can only be applied for correction of the family relation register with the permission of the court pursuant to Article 104 of the Act, and since the family relation register was accepted against the person who did not report the birth, and there is no way to directly confirm or correct the family relation register between Byung and the family relation register.

Articles 104 and 107 of the Act on the Registration, etc. of Family Relationship; Article 2 of the Family Litigation Act

Plaintiff (Law Firm Blst, Attorneys Kim Gyeong-tae et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Defendant

April 28, 2017

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

It is confirmed that there is no natural relationship between the plaintiff and the deceased non-party 1 (resident registration number 1 omitted) and the defendant.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 23, 1962, the Plaintiff and the deceased non-party 1 [resident registration number 1 omitted] (the address omitted), Busan Jung-gu (the address omitted), and the death of April 12, 2016] have Nonparty 2 (resident registration number 2 omitted) under the chain of a legal couple who reported marriage on May 23, 1962.

B. Around October 22, 1971, the Plaintiff and the deceased Nonparty 1 were born on March 3, 1971 on the part of the Defendant, the deceased Non-Party 1, who was born on March 3, 1971. Accordingly, the Plaintiff and the deceased Non-Party 1 were registered as the second person in the family relations register of the Plaintiff and deceased Non-Party 1.

C. The plaintiff and the deceased non-party 1's resident registration number are only (710303-).

D. According to the result of the fact-finding inquiry to the head of Busan Central District Office, the defendant's date of birth (the date of March 3, 1971) and its original domicile (the address omitted) cannot be confirmed only by the defendant's resident registration number and address.

E. Although the Plaintiff filed an application to correct the registry No. 2016No. 707 with the Busan Family Court, the Plaintiff was dismissed on September 30, 2016, and Nonparty 2 filed an application for correction of the registry No. 2016No. 491 with the Busan Family Court, but was dismissed on July 27, 2016.

[Based on recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7 (including numbers if there are various numbers), and the result of fact-finding to the head of Busan Central Government, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the legitimacy of a claim for confirmation of absence of a natural relationship between the plaintiff, the defendant, the deceased non-party 1 and the defendant

A. The plaintiff asserts that there is a benefit to seek confirmation of the absence of a natural father's relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant in order to correct errors in the family relations register, since the defendant, which is entered as the person between the plaintiff and the deceased non-party 1 in the family relations register, is not a dead person.

B. ex officio, Article 104 of the Act on the Registration, etc. of Family Relationship (hereinafter “the Act”) provides for an application for correction of a family relation register with permission from a family court. Article 107 of the Act provides for an application for correction of a family relation register with permission from a family court. Since an application for correction of a family relation register with permission from a court is permitted in cases where matters to be corrected are insignificant in light of the simplification of the procedure, it shall be deemed that an application for correction of a family relation register with respect to matters that may have a significant effect on the family law or inheritance law can only be filed in accordance with a final judgment pursuant to Article 107 of the Act. The issue of whether the matters to be entered in the family relation register intended for correction have a significant effect on the family relation register with respect to the matters to be entered in the family relation register with a family relation register with which it is intended to correct are stipulated in Article 2 of the Family Litigation Act. Article 107 of the Act shall be deemed to have a significant impact on the family relation register with which it is permitted under Article 1053 of the Family Litigation Act.

C. Examining the Plaintiff’s assertion on this case, even if based on the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Defendant is an unclaimed person, and even based on the above facts, the Defendant appears to be a deceased person. However, if the report of birth against a deceased person is accepted and entered in the family register, the direct method of litigation is not only prescribed in the Family Litigation Act, but also in other laws or Supreme Court Regulations, but also cannot bring a lawsuit against a deceased person. Thus, the correction of the family register on this matter is bound to be dealt with in accordance with Article 104 of the Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 20103-1).

D. Therefore, a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the absence of a natural relationship between the plaintiff and the deceased non-party 1 and each defendant is unlawful.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, all of the plaintiff's lawsuits of this case are dismissed.

Judges Kim Jong-soo