A. Criteria to distinguish between the application for correction of a family register according to a final judgment and the application for correction of a family register according to permission of the court (=whether or not a judgment can be obtained pursuant to Article 2 of the Family Litigation Act)

(b) Whether a correction of entry in the family register on the date or time of death is subject to the correction of entry in the family register by the permission of a court pursuant to Article 120 of the Family Register Act;

A. In light of Articles 2(1) and 2(2) of the Family Litigation Act, a system that limits the method of litigation to resolve disputes over matters that have a significant impact on the occurrence, modification, and extinction of the family relationship, it is reasonable to view that the method of direct litigation is stipulated in Article 2 of the Family Litigation Act with respect to the existence or absence of the family relation relation to the matters to be corrected, and that all the matters to be judged have a significant impact on the Family Litigation Act or inheritance law, and that the correction of the family register can only be applied for the correction of the family register in accordance with the final judgment pursuant to Article 123 of the Family Register Act, and that the correction of the entry in the family register with respect to matters that cannot be decided by Article 2 of the same Act can be applied for the correction with the permission of the court in accordance with Article 120 of the Family Register Act.

B. As to the determination of whether or not a person dies or the date and time of death of a person, a direct litigation method is not only required by the Family Litigation Act, but also by other laws or Supreme Court Regulations, and thus, a correction of the entry in the family register on such matters should be processed in accordance with Article 120 of the Family Register Act

Article 120 of the Family Register Act

Supreme Court Order 86S15 Dated September 4, 1986 (Gong1986,138) 86S22,23,24,25 Dated October 21, 1986 (Gong1987,236) 86S34 Dated February 2, 1987 (Gong1987,645) 81S19 Dated May 6, 1987 (Gong86S29,30,31 Dated May 8, 1987) 86S29,97 Dated November 20, 1989 (Gong190,197, 197, 1947, 194, 197, 197)

Applicant (Attorney Seo Hong, Counsel for the applicant-appellant)

The deceased case principal 1 et al.

Daegu District Court Order 91B2,23,24 Dated December 4, 1991

The order of the court below is reversed and the case is remanded to the Daegu District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of reappeal of an applicant's agent are examined.

1. Article 120 of the Family Register Act provides for the application for correction of the entry in the family register according to the permission of the family court, while Article 123 of the Family Register Act provides for the application for correction of the entry in the family register according to a final judgment. Since the correction of the entry in the family register according to the permission of the court is permitted only when the matter to be corrected is minor in light of the simplification of the procedure, with respect to matters that may have a serious effect on the family law or inheritance law, it shall be deemed that the application

2. The problem is whether or not the family register to be corrected has a serious effect on the family law or inheritance law, and Article 2(1) of the Family Litigation Act of Korea, which provides for the special case of the family case, sets out a large number of types of family litigation cases in classifying family litigation cases into family litigation cases and family non-litigation cases into Category A, B, and C according to their individual nature. Article 2(2) of the Family Litigation Act provides that the family litigation cases shall be categorized into Class B, B, and C, and Article 123 of the Family Litigation Act provides that the types of family litigation cases shall be determined in the form of other Acts or the Supreme Court Regulations, and the method of litigation shall be restricted in order to resolve disputes over matters which have a significant effect on the occurrence, change, and extinction of the family relation. In light of the above Article 2(2) of the Family Litigation Act, it is reasonable to apply for the correction of the family register under Article 20 of the Family Litigation Act in accordance with the final judgment and Article 123 of the Family Litigation Act.

Therefore, with respect to the determination of whether or not a person dies or the date or time of death of a person as in the case of this case, there is no direct litigation method as well as any other law or Supreme Court Regulations as well as the Family Litigation Act, so the correction of the entry in the family register as to this matter must be dealt with in accordance with Article 120 of the Family Register

3. Of the previously expressed opinions, on the grounds that the correction of the entry in the family register on the date and time of death or on the date and time of death would have a serious impact on the relative law or inheritance law, an opinion interpreted that the entry in the family register on such matters may be corrected only by a final and conclusive judgment (as of December 14, 1982; as of May 6, 1987; as of November 20, 1989; as of November 24, 1990; as of January 24, 1990; as of May 8, 1987; as of May 29, 300; and as of the date and time of death, the opinion expressed in this opinion) shall be modified.

4. Thus, the order of the court below which dismissed the applicant's appeal against the first instance court ruling dismissing the applicant's application for permission to correct the family register of this case on the ground that the entry of the applicant's family register as to the date and time of death in the deceased case 1 can be corrected only by the final judgment, is erroneous in the misunderstanding of legal principles as to the correction of the entry in the family register,

5. Therefore, the order of the court below shall be reversed and the case shall be remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

[Attachment Appellant]

Chief Justice Kim Yong-ju (Presiding Justice) (Presiding Justice)