Where the address of the party liable for registration is not clearly indicated in the register of the party liable for registration in a judgment ordering cancellation of registration, whether

In the judgment ordering cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage, the judgment cannot be seen as an obvious error because it did not indicate the address of the party who is the obligor, while indicating the address of the party who is the obligor.

Article 197(1) of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court Order 87Da50 Dated October 28, 1987 (Gong1987, 1783) 89Da18 Dated January 11, 1990 (Gong1990, 937) dated May 27, 1992 (Gong192, 2108)

Attorney Lee Jong-chul et al., Counsel for the special appellant-appellant and one other

Busan District Court Order 94Kaga938 Dated April 11, 1994

All special appeals are dismissed.

The grounds for special appeal are examined.

It is obvious that there is an obvious error in miscalculation, clerical error, or any other similar mistake in the judgment, and in this case, the judgment ordering the cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage, such as in this case, it cannot be said that there is an obvious error in the judgment on the ground that the address of the Defendants, who are the obligor, was indicated and the address on other

In the same purport, the court below's dismissal of the application for the correction of the judgment of this case is justified, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as the theory of lawsuit

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

Justices Jeong Jong-ho (Presiding Justice)