If a family member other than the head of household dies before the enforcement of the new Civil Code, his/her lineal descendant

If a family member who was not the head of family dies before the enforcement of the new civil law, the miscarriage was customary at the time of the equal inheritance of the lineal descendant.

Article 100 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 69Da1324 delivered on April 14, 1970, 79Da1741 delivered on December 11, 1979

Plaintiff

Defendant-Appellant No. 1

Seoul High Court Decision 74Na2437 delivered on May 13, 1975

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The appeal of the defendant's representative shall be examined.

According to the records, the court of first instance served the documents of lawsuit against the defendant on the "Maak-gu (No. 1 Service)", but the defendant was unable to serve on the "Maak-gu (No. 2 Service). However, although the address was corrected to the "Maak-gu (No. 2 Service), the defendant was unable to serve on the above address, and the court below also served the lawsuit by ordering the documents of lawsuit to serve by public notice on the "Maak-gu (No. 2 Service)" with the document proving that the defendant did not reside on the above address. The court below's decision also served the documents of lawsuit on the "Maak-gu (No. 2 Service)" but it was impossible to serve on the defendant by public notice upon the plaintiff's request for service by public notice. In this case, unless the defendant was a director to escape the plaintiff's complaint by public notice, the defendant is deemed to have failed to know the service of the judgment without negligence, and if the defendant could not comply with the peremptory period for filing the appeal, this constitutes a case where the defendant's appeal can be filed within two weeks from the date.

Next, the defendant's attorney's second ground of appeal is examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below found that the non-party 1, the non-party 2, and the non-party 3 testimony respectively entered in the family register Nos. 1 through 3 (a certified copy, a certified copy of family register, a certified copy of family register No. 1), and the non-party 4, the plaintiff's prior owner of the non-party 5 and the non-party 6, purchased 1 forest land No. 9 from the non-party 6 on March 1, 194, the non-party 5 and the non-party 6's joint ownership transfer registration on the non-party 4, the non-party 6's deceased on May 10, 1956 and the non-party 6's deceased family's deceased family's non-party 6's deceased family's non-party 9's deceased family's deceased family's non-party 1 and the non-party 6's deceased family's deceased family's deceased family's new inheritance No. 94.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 406 of the Civil Procedure Act, and the case is remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Yoon Il-young (Presiding Justice)