(a) The nature of an appeal against a decision of dismissal of the judgment or revision report

B. The Plaintiff’s address and whether it constitutes an obvious error that the address of another registry is not separately indicated (negative)

A. A decision to dismiss an application for the rectification of judgment, which is groundless, shall not file an appeal, and the special appeal under Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act shall be permitted, and even if the applicant does not specify that the application is a special appeal, it shall be treated as a special appeal.

B. In a judgment ordering the procedure for cancellation of ownership transfer registration, the Plaintiff’s address, who is the right holder, did not specify the address on the registry in a case where the address is different from that on the registry, and cannot be deemed to have an obvious error as stipulated in Article 197 of the Civil Procedure Act,

A. Articles 197 and 420(b) of the Civil Procedure Act

(a) Supreme Court Order 82Ma41 Dated July 26, 1966 66Ma579 Dated May 11, 1982

Special Appellants

Other than 1 et al.

Seoul Central District Court Order 83Ka1245 dated January 20, 1983

The special appeal is dismissed.

We examine the grounds for special appeal.

According to the interpretation of the main text of Article 197(3) of the Civil Procedure Act, an appeal may not be filed against a decision dismissing an application for correction of a judgment that is groundless, and as such, a special appeal under Article 420 of the same Act may be permitted. Therefore, the appeal of this case, which is not clearly stated that the applicant is a special appeal, shall be treated as

The correction of the judgment is clearly made in cases where there is an error in miscalculation, clerical error, or any other similar error in the judgment, and in this case, in order to order the defendant to cancel the registration of transfer of ownership, the address of the plaintiff, who is the right holder, is different from that on the register, and thus, it cannot be deemed that there is so-called obvious error in the judgment because the address of the plaintiff, who is the right holder, is not separately indicated on the register, is not different from that on the register. In theory, the lawsuit cannot be accepted only in cases where the plaintiff, unless the address on the register of the plaintiff, is stated on the register, unless it is stated on the register of the plaintiff. In the same purport, the wife who dismissed the application for correction

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

Justices O Sung-sung(Presiding Justice)