Whether the name and permanent domicile of the mother can be corrected by the correction of the family register in accordance with Article 120 of the Family Register Act (negative)

Since the name and permanent domicile of the mother are matters that have a serious effect on the relatives and the inheritance law, such correction shall be based on the final judgment, and it shall not be corrected by the correction of the family register in accordance with Article 120 of the Family Register Act.

Article 120, Article 123 of the Family Register Act

Supreme Court Decision 78S1 Delivered on April 25, 1979

Appellant Principal Reappeal et al. and one other

Chuncheon District Court Order 88BE3,4,5 dated April 22, 1988

The reappeal is dismissed.

The grounds of reappeal are examined as follows.

The summary of this case's application for correction of the family register is as follows: first, the re-appellant is the same as the re-appeal 1 of the Australia located in the Republic of Korea, in order to simplify the fact that the re-appeal is the same as that of the non-appeal 1 of the Republic of Korea, which is located in the family register of the non-appeal 1, the above re-appeal 2 of the non-appeal 1 and the non-appeal 3 of the non-appeal 1, which remains in the above re-appeal 1, and the above wife and the person shall be cancelled, and the above wife and the person shall be allowed to be entered in the family register of the re-appeal 4, and second, the purport of the re-appellant's mother is to permit the correction of the true family register because it is non-appeal 6, which is the non-appeal 5, both the descendants of the non-appeal 5, located in the Gangseo-si and the

The first point is that the re-appellant and the second point is the same person, but it is clear that the above two persons cannot be permitted because there is no evidence to regard them as the same person in the record, and with respect to the second point, the correction of the name and the permanent domicile of the mother is a matter of significant influence on the relatives and the inheritance law, so this correction should be based on the final judgment, and it is not a matter to be corrected by the correction of the family register in accordance with Article 120 of the Family Register Act.

In the same purport, the court below is justified to dismiss the appeal by maintaining the decision of the first instance court which rejected the application for correction of the family register.

Therefore, the reappeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Young-ju (Presiding Justice)