[이혼 등][공1991.4.15.(894),1089]
Where the husband, who is a son of the final family, claims a divorce on the ground that the husband is unable to be pregnant of the wife, the case dismissing the husband's petition for divorce and admitting the wife's petition for divorce.
The case dismissing a claim for divorce filed by the husband on the ground that her husband's failure to give birth is no longer a legal ground for divorce, and that the husband's failure to give birth to the other spouse is no longer a legal ground for divorce, and that the husband's appeal for divorce is dismissed on the ground that her husband's failure to give birth to the other spouse is no longer a legal ground for divorce.
Article 840 of the Civil Act
Claimant (respond-Appellee)
The respondent (Appellant for Anti-Appellant)
Seoul High Court Decision 88Reu3727 (main trial), 3734 (Refence) decided March 27, 1989
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal shall be assessed against the appellant.
We examine the grounds of appeal.
According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, since around May 1987, the respondent was unable to reach an agreement on divorce between the defendant and his/her spouse on the grounds that the defendant had been unable to reach an agreement on divorce between the defendant and his/her spouse on the grounds that the defendant had been unable to reach an agreement on divorce by taking into account the above facts that the defendant had been unable to reach an agreement on divorce between the defendant and his/her spouse on the grounds that the defendant had been unable to reach an agreement on divorce by taking into account the fact that the defendant had been unable to reach an agreement on divorce by taking into account the fact that the defendant had been unable to reach an agreement on divorce between the defendant and his/her spouse on the grounds that the defendant had been unable to reach an agreement on divorce by taking into account the fact that the defendant had been unable to reach an agreement on divorce between the defendant and his/her spouse on the grounds that he/she had been unable to reach an agreement on divorce by taking into account the fact that the defendant had reached an agreement on divorce between the defendant and the defendant on the grounds that he/she had been on divorce.
We cannot accept the judgment of the court below on the premise that the principal responsibility for the failure of marriage was against the respondent in the above opposing view.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Choi Jae-ho (Presiding Justice)