Applicant and Principal of the case

Busan Family Court Order 2018Na105 dated February 27, 2018

The appeal of this case is dismissed.

The decision of the court of first instance shall be revoked. It shall be permitted to revise the term "laver" in Korean version of the family relation register of the principal of the case as "laver".

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

The applicant and the principal of the case (hereinafter referred to as the "applicant") have used the sex as "gold" for a daily life and stated the sex as "gold" in a certified copy of resident registration. However, the first instance court's decision dismissing an applicant's application for correction of the applicant's sex is unfair, by recognizing the exception to the rules of two Acts in accordance with Article 104 or 105 of the Act on the Registration, etc. of Family Relationship (hereinafter referred to as the "Family Relationship Act") and Article 2 of the established rules on the method of recording his name in the family relation register (Article 510 of the established rules of two Acts; hereinafter referred to as the "established rules of two Acts"), but the first instance court's decision dismissing the applicant's application for correction is unreasonable.

2. Determination

Article 104(1) of the Family Relationship Registration Act provides that “When the recording of a registry is not permitted by law, or there is any error or omission in such recording, any interested person may apply for rectification of the registry with the permission of the Family Court having jurisdiction over the original domicile of the principal of the case.” Article 105(1) of the same Act provides that “If the recording in the register was made with respect to an act becoming effective due to the filing of the report but it is evident that such act is null and void, the person who filed the report or the principal of the reported case may apply for rectification of the registry with the permission of the Family Court having jurisdiction over the original domicile of the case.” Meanwhile, Article 2 of the same Act of the same case provides that “When the recording in Korean is made, the person who filed the report or the principal of the reported case may apply for rectification of the registry, with the permission of the Family Court having jurisdiction over the original domicile of the case.”

Since the two sound rules do not appear to have been generated in the first head of the word, such as 2, 4, etc., or are a rule that is generated in another sound, changing the Korean translation of the Kim (gold) weather from “Glaver,” as alleged by the applicant, cannot be deemed as an exception to the application of the two sound rules as stipulated in Article 2 of the Rules.

In addition, the mission of the family relation register system is to be notarized by recording the matters concerning the applicant's status, and since the family relation register is the only public account book in charge of this mission, the matters entered in the family relation register are presumed to correspond to the truth unless there is any clear reflective evidence to reverse it, gender is presumed to be consistent with the fact, sexual intercourse has the nature of a certain change with a innate and principle mark indicating the blood source, sexual intercourse has the nature of gold (gold) as the principal note among the sex weather in Korea, and the applicant's Korean translation in the family relation register cannot be deemed to be contrary to the indication in accordance with Article 2 of the Rules of the Republic of Korea. Considering that the applicant's Korean translation in the family relation register cannot be deemed to be contrary to the indication in accordance with Article 104 (1) of the Registration, etc. of Family Relations Act, it is difficult to view that the applicant's Korean translation in the family relation register as "entire" is not possible under the law, or there is any error or omission in the register, or a report of creation under Article 105 (1).

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the application of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the decision of the court of first instance is legitimate with its conclusion, and the appeal of the applicant is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Jong-young (Presiding Judge)