(a) A family heir in cases where the family head who is a married family member under custom of the Gu dies;

(b) Action for the invalidation of family inheritance and action for the recovery of family inheritance;

(c) The form of a lawsuit to correct the case where Samnam becomes a successor to Australia (=the lawsuit to nullify inheritance)

(d) Where a party to a lawsuit dies after the closing of argument, the court shall render a judgment.

(e) Person who has taken over the lawsuit for nullification of family inheritance;

A. According to the customs prior to the enforcement of the Civil Act, in a case where the head of family died without a male being inherited, if the head of the family succeeds to the head of the family according to the principle of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law of the law

B. A general lawsuit that revises the cause of nullity of family inheritance is a lawsuit for invalidity of family inheritance under Article 2 subparagraph 9 of the Personnel Litigation Act and Articles 53 through 55 of the same Act. Among them, a lawsuit that regards the true heir as a dispute over the existence of inheritance rights against a person who is referred to as the true heir, who is likely to be mistaken for the true heir by a third party on the entry in the family registry, is a lawsuit for recovery of family inheritance under Article 982 of the Civil Act. This legal principle also applies to a claim for recovery of inheritance, which has been recognized under the customary law prior to the enforcement

C. According to the record in the family register at the time of commencement of the inheritance, it is obvious that Gap, who is the head of the deceased, is not the heir of the family, and therefore, it is not possible to be mistaken for the heir of the family head. Thus, this is reasonable to view that the case where the legality and validity of Eul's inheritance following the death of the former head of family does not constitute a lawsuit for recovery of inheritance of the family head, but constitutes a lawsuit for nullification of inheritance, and therefore, the limitation period under Article 982 of the Civil Act does

D. Although Party A, who was the claimant for the instant case, died after the closing of argument in the lower court, it cannot be deemed unlawful even if the lower court rendered a judgment without going through the procedure of litigation.

(e) A person who has the right to institute a suit over the invalidity of the inheritance of Australia under Article 54 (1) of the Personnel Litigation Act may take over the litigation procedures for the invalidity of inheritance filed by another person who has the right to institute a suit pursuant to Articles 55 and 28 of the same Act.

A. Article 984(b) of the Civil Act: Article 982 of the said Act; Article 2 subparag. 9 of the Personnel Litigation Act; Article 54(1) of the said Act; Article 982 of the Civil Act; Article 54(1)4 of the Personnel Litigation Act; Articles 190, 211(e) of the Civil Procedure Act; Articles 54, 55, and 28 of the Personnel Litigation Act

A. Supreme Court Decision 80Da2755 Delivered on December 22, 1981

Claimant

[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1

Seoul High Court Decision 86Reu275 delivered on February 16, 1987

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the appellee.

As to the Grounds of Appeal:

1. According to the customs prior to the enforcement of the current Civil Code, where the head of the family died without a male to inherit, the head of the deceased family does not have any case where the head of the deceased family succeeds to the head of the deceased family according to the principle of the net rule, but this is about the case where the head of the deceased family is an unmarried person at the time of the death of the head of the family. Even if the head of the deceased without the male to inherit as in this case, if the head of the deceased family is the married person at the time of the death, the head of the deceased family temporarily succeeds to the head of the deceased family until the father, wife, and his father is appointed in the order of respect, and the head of the deceased family cannot be the heir of the family (see Supreme Court Decision 80Da2755 delivered on December 22, 1981). In the same purport, the court below is correct to determine that the head of the

Therefore, since the entry of the family register, which was entered as if the non-party 1 succeeded to the family register due to the death of the non-party 2 in Australia, is contrary to the legitimate family inheritance relationship, the claimant who is the true family heir can seek correction thereof, or as to the method of seeking correction of the wrong family inheritance relationship, the two lawsuits for recovery of inheritance and for invalidation of inheritance are stipulated in our legislation.

However, in light of the fact that the inheritance system under the Civil Act takes the legal principle of inheritance and if there occurs a cause for the inheritance prescribed by the law, the heir prescribed by the law naturally succeeds to the inheritance in Australia, and there is no ex post facto renunciation of inheritance in relation to the inheritance in Australia, and that such invalidation is all null and void, and that it is the length of ensuring the legal justice that the rectification of the invalidation of the inheritance in Australia should be made at any time by the action of the interested parties. In light of the fact that the general lawsuit correcting the cause for the invalidation of the inheritance in Australia is a lawsuit for the invalidation of the inheritance in Australia as stipulated in Article 2 subparagraph 9 and Articles 53 through 55 of the Personnel Litigation Act, and it is reasonable to say that it is a lawsuit for the recovery of the inheritance in Australia, which is specially prepared in Article 982 of the Civil Act, for the dispute

Therefore, regardless of the entry in the family register, a true heir who means a person whose right of inheritance is recognized in accordance with the true status is considered to be an inheritor on the family register at the time of the commencement of inheritance, but if a person who does not correspond to an inheritor in accordance with the true status, that is, a person who would be mistaken for a true heir by a third party, has filed a lawsuit against a true heir, which refers to a person who would be mistaken for a true heir, the existence of the right of inheritance should be disputed as a lawsuit for recovery of family inheritance under Article 982 of the Civil Act. Such legal principle should also be seen as likewise to a claim

According to the decision of the court below in this case, it is proper that the non-party 2, who had a claim of Australia, died, after obtaining permission from the family court of Australia on June 30, 1950, the non-party 3, non-party 4, non-party 2, non-party 5, non-party 6, non-party 3, non-party 1, non-party 5, non-party 1, and non-party 7, non-party 6, non-party 3, non-party 5, and the non-party 4, non-party 8, and the non-party 2 died without his own awareness on October 6, 1974 and the non-party 2's death did not constitute the non-party 1, the non-party 2, non-party 3, non-party 1, and the non-party 1, non-party 1, who is the family registry heir at the time of the commencement of inheritance. Thus, the non-party 1, the non-party 1, non-party 1, cannot be included in the family registry.

2. No. 2 of the theory of lawsuit is asserted in the original judgment that there is an error in the rules of evidence, incomplete hearing, or lack of reasoning in the original judgment, and it cannot be viewed as a legitimate ground for appeal.

3. Although the claimant died on February 5, 1987, which was after the closing of argument of the court below, it cannot be deemed unlawful even if the court below sentenced the judgment without the procedure of taking over a lawsuit.

A lawsuit over the invalidity of family registry may be instituted by the spouse, lineal blood relatives and collateral blood relatives within the arms and sale relationship of the deceased under Article 54 (1) of the Personnel Litigation Act, and such person with the right to institute a lawsuit may take over the litigation procedures over the invalidity of inheritance brought by another person with the right to institute a lawsuit under Articles 55 and 28 of the same Act. A request for intervention by succession on December 29, 198, other than the claim of lineal descendants of the deceased claimant who falls under the person with the right to institute a lawsuit over the invalidity of inheritance of this case, may be considered as a request for succession under Articles 55 and 28 of the Personnel Litigation Act, so there is no illegality such as the theory of lawsuit.

5. Ultimately, the arguments are without merit, and this appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Sang-won (Presiding Justice)