In case where a report of the registry of a family register was filed with the person who did not report the original registry of the family register, but did not complete the marriage report as prescribed by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Ship and Family Affairs as the wife, whether the marriage takes effect following the report.

When the original family register was reported by the deceased, other than the plaintiff, who was the 38 degrees north of north latitude after the disaster, in accordance with Article 179 (Provisions on Temporary Measures in Family Register) of the South Korean Government Act, the family register was reported by the defendant of the original family register and the defendant of the family register was not reported by the defendant of the above family register at the same time as the above report of the marriage was made by the plaintiff of the above family register and the defendant was made by making a report of the family register as his wife, even though the above deceased and the defendant had an intention to marry between the above deceased and the defendant at the time of the above report of the family register was made, even if they had an intention to marry between the above deceased and the defendant at the time of the above report of the family register, the entry of the family register on December 29, 196 in the current family register under Article 1238 (No. 1238) (No. 1962) cannot be effective.

Article 815 of the Civil Act, Article 76 of the former Family Register Act (amended by Act No. 4298 of Dec. 31, 1990), Article 179 of the South and North Korean Government Act, Article 11 of the Shipbuilding Decree, and Article 84 of the same Decree

Claimant

appellees

1. On February 27, 1950, the marriage between the respondent and the non-party 1 is confirmed to be null and void from among the family register organized by the report to the head of the Jung-gu Seoul Central Government on February 27, 1950;

2. The trial expenses shall be borne by the respondent.

The same shall apply to the order.

In full view of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 1 and 2 (each transcript), Gap evidence Nos. 3 (resident registration card), and Gap evidence Nos. 4 (resident registration certificate), and the whole purport of the testimony and examination of the witness non-party Nos. 1 and 2, the deceased non-party Nos. 1 are north of 38 degrees of north latitude, and the defendant was living together with the defendant from August 15 to December 3, 1948, and the defendant did not report the defendant's marriage under the family register No. 2, which was enforced at the time of birth of 3, Dec. 14, 1949, and the defendant did not report the defendant's marriage under the family register No. 1 and 2 (the defendant's family register No. 1 and the defendant's family register No. 179 (the defendant's family register No. 2, the defendant's family register No. 1 and the defendant's family register No. 4 were not reported the defendant's legitimate marriage. 9. 2.

Therefore, the same statement that the defendant reported the marriage with non-party 1 on the defendant's family register or on the current family register is due to the false report of the above network claims at the time of the family register of February 27, 1950, and there was no legitimate marriage report between the defendant and non-party 1 at the time of filing the above family register report. Thus, even if there was no intention to marry between them at the time of filing the above family register report, it is not possible to enter the above family register or the current family register alone in the above family register as it is not possible to bring into force of marriage. Accordingly, it is impossible to bring into force of marriage. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal of this case which is just and accepted it, and the costs of trial shall be judged as per Disposition by the losing defendant at the expense of the losing defendant.

Judges Egro-con (Presiding Judge) Korea