Whether a person, who had been omitted in the family register in the process of re-making a family register destroyed by fire, shall correct the removed register of the deceased father and the husband, and whether a person, who is the husband's family heir born between the husband and another woman, can be registered in the family register of the husband.

When Eul filed a report of marriage with the head of Eul and the head of Eul, and the family register of Eul was destroyed due to fire, Eul filed a report of the circumstance that Byung omitted Eul's family register in the process of re-making Eul's family register as one's wife, Gap was omitted, Eul's family register was omitted, Eul's family register was omitted, Eul's non-existent family register was omitted, and Gap's non-existent family register was omitted at the time of newly organizing the family register due to Eul's death and death of Byung and death of Byung, and then Gap entered the family register as one's family register at the time of newly organizing the family register, and Gap remains in the family register. Thus, in case Eul's family register remains in the family register, it is obvious that Eul filed a report of marriage with the head of Eul and Byung, and Gap filed a report of marriage with the head of the family register without the family register.

Articles 116(1) and 120 of the Family Register Act

Applicant and Principal of the case

The deceased Principal of the case

Other Party

Changwon District Court Decision 9No. 264, 265 decided June 18, 1993

1. Revocation of the order of the court below

2. The applicant and the principal of the case shall be entered in the family register of 973 head of the Dong-gun, Dong-gun, Dong-gun, Dong-gun, Dong-gun, Dong-gun, Dong-gun, Dong-gun, and the person of the case shall be entered in the annexed identification list. The above location of the principal of the family in the same Eup/Myeon shall be entered in the column for the identity of the person of the case of the deceased case among the expulsions of the principal of the family case in the same Eup/Myeon-gun, Dong-gun, Dong-gun, Dong-gun, Dong-gun, Dong-gun, Dong-gun, Dong-gun, Dong-gun, and the report of marriage shall be entered in the column for the identity of the principal of the case of the deceased case of May 27, 1949.

The same shall apply to the order.

In full view of the records: (a) a copy of the family register other than the applicant 1; (b) a copy of the family register of the applicant and the applicant 2, and 3; (c) a copy of the family register other than the applicant 1; (d) a copy of the family register other than the applicant 4; and (e) a copy of the family register other than the applicant 4; (e) a copy of the confirmation document of the family register which was prepared by the head of the Eup/Myeon; and (e) the fact-finding and inquiry of the head of the Busan police station at the court below; and (e) the fact-finding and testimony other than the witness 4, the applicant was born between the applicant 3 and 5; and (e) the applicant was no other than the applicant 1; and (e) a new copy of the family register other than the applicant 1; and (e) the applicant was no other than the applicant 2,000 on May 27, 1949; and (g) the applicant was no other than the head of the Eup/Eup/Myeon, his permanent domicile 20.2.

According to the above facts, it is obvious that the omission of the applicant's family register in the above applicant's respective expulsions in the above applicant's non-applicants 2 and the principal's respective expulsions is due to the omission of the above removals, so the above removals shall be corrected as stated in the order, and the application of this case by the applicant who seeks permission for the entry of the applicant who is currently infinite due to the omission of the above removals in the above removals, as stated in the order of the above applicant's family register No. 1, who is the family heir of the above case, as the above applicant's family register, shall be accepted. Accordingly, the decision of the court below is improper in concluding this differently, and it is decided as per the

Judges Goi (Presiding Judge) Goi (Presiding Judge)