인감증명의 효력과 발급공무원의 주의의무

The validity of a certificate of one s seal impression and duty of care of the service personnel working in authorities

The seal certification system was changed as of Jan 1, 2003 into an indirect certification system referred to as ‘registration certification system’, in which copies of the original seal impressions registered to the authorities are issued. One recent judicial decision made by a lower court thereby states that the validity of seal certificates has been changed due to the revised seal certification act, which means owing a seal certificate is not enoughto legally identify himself/herself to other parties under the current seal certification act in force. Therefore, the party who is going to make a contract with other parties using seal certificates is solely responsible to crosscheck the opposite party’s identification in such a way that the seal impression shown on the certificates is compared with the real seal to be used as well as inspecting national identification card, personal reference or referees. A certificate of one s seal impression, originating in Japan in early the 20th century, is a system to identify a seal with the person concerned. Previously, certificates were issued when an imprint of the seal was found to be identified to the seal held by the certifying office. The seal certification system, in which the authorities certify the trueness of seal impressions in an official way, has to be differently applied as the social circumstances change, and the newly issued seal certificates can certify the trueness of personal identity no longer. In fact, owing a seal certificate does not necessarily mean that the certificate holder is the person concerned himself / herself. Nevertheless, the seal certificates have been used to prove the trueness of documents in common practice although the certificates are commonly issued without careful personal identification check. The seal certification system, of course, still contributes to constitute the trueness of documents. Owing to the fact, some people argue that the seal certificates may certify not only the genuineness of seal impressions, but also the trueness of personal identities and even that a certain contract is entered under the agreement by a person whose seal certificate is presented. However, the seal certificate’s ability to prove the genuineness of a seal impression is apart from the trueness of a document. The recent fraud cases using seal certificatesare attributable to careless personal identification check. Under the current indirect certification system, reinforced identification check process may burden the responsibility of the service personnel working in the authorities, which is opposed to the purpose of the shake-up. The provisions concerning personal identification check in the seal certification act should not just remain unapplied in the text. The regulations should be constructed based on the domestic circumstances. The reason why the certification system has been changed should be carefully reconsidered. One thing that should be pointedout is that the seal certification system of Korea has exactly followed that of Japan. Since the seal certification act wasrevised, the seal certificates are valid to use only for the genuineness of seal impressions. The personal identity or agreement of a party in making contracts cannot be guaranteed by the seal certificates any longer. The downgraded force of the seal certificates does necessarily lead to the weakened duty of care that should be taken by the authorities. Likewise, widely spread abuse of seal certificates will be gradually eradicated from the common practice.