[1] The case where a special appeal under Article 449(1) of the Civil Procedure Act can be made against a ruling dismissing a request for correction of judgment on the ground of a violation of the Constitution

[2] In a case where a special appellant filed an application for correction to his/her address on the resident registration by alleging that the place of service instead of his/her address on the resident registration was written due to mistake in the judgment of the court of first instance, the case holding that the order of the court below that dismissed the application for correction without a particular deliberation, even though the above judgment was clearly recognized as an error caused by the party’s mistake, and that such error constitutes a case where the above judgment should be corrected, considering the evidence submitted, it is obvious that it constitutes an obvious error

[1] Articles 211 and 449(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, Article 27 of the Constitution / [2] Articles 211 and 449(1) of the Civil Procedure Act

[1] Supreme Court Order 2003Ga136 dated June 25, 2004 (Gong2004Ha, 1302)

Special Appellants

Chuncheon District Court Order 201Kaman84 dated June 24, 2011

The order of the court below shall be reversed, and the case shall be remanded to Chuncheon District Court Branch Branch.

The grounds of special appeal are examined.

Article 449(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that a special appeal may be made to the Supreme Court only on the ground that there is a violation of the Constitution that affected the judgment, or that there is a violation of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea or of an order, rule, or disposition that is the premise of the judgment, or that the judgment is unreasonable. Here, the existence of a violation of the Constitution that affected the conclusion of the judgment in regard to the ruling or order shall include cases where the right to a fair trial is infringed in accordance with legitimate procedures prescribed in Article 27 of the Constitution in the procedure of the ruling or the order. If the applicant intends to violate the Constitution in regard to the dismissal of the request for rectification of the judgment, whether such decision was made in the absence of any opportunity to submit necessary materials in the judgment or whether there was an error in the judgment by the data submitted after the ruling or the judgment was rendered during the entire process of the lawsuit, even though it is evident that there was an error in the judgment by the data submitted after the ruling or the judgment was rendered, the case where the court dismissed the decision by combining it, etc. (see Supreme Court Order 203Da13636

According to the records, the court below filed the application of this case with the special appellant's resident registration number of 2004Kadan515 delivered on May 11, 2005, which stated "(resident registration number omitted)" and the address of 209, "Fongyang-gun, Yangyang-gun, Yangyang-gun, Yangyang-gun, which is a special appellant under the above judgment, stated the place of service instead of his/her resident registration address as at the time of the above judgment, and changed the address of 19, which is "Yyang-gun, Yangyang-gun, Yangyang-gun, Yangyang-gun, Yang-gun, which is a resident registration address (number 2 omitted)." The court below stated the above judgment attached to the application of this case and the certified copy of the resident registration number of 1, who is a special appellant, as at the time of the above judgment, and rejected the application of this case without any further deliberation. However, the special appellant's name, which is a special mother's name, and the name and address of 1, which is the above 2097.

In full view of these circumstances, the address of the Plaintiff Special Appellant in the above judgment constitutes an error caused by the party’s mistake, and such error is clear that the above judgment should be corrected because it can be clearly acknowledged in light of the evidence submitted to the court below. Accordingly, the order of the court below that dismissed the instant application, thereby violating the Constitution that affected the conclusion of the judgment.

Therefore, the order of the court below is reversed, and this part of the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Park Poe-dae (Presiding Justice)