The case holding that there is any other serious cause not to exercise parental authority as prescribed in Article 924 of the Civil Act.

Since a person with parental authority left a third and one another's own consciousness without permission, the absence of any awareness for ten years shall be limited to the case where there is a serious reason for which it is impossible to exercise parental authority over the above consciousness.

Article 924 of the Civil Act

Claimant

appellees

1. The respondent shall lose parental authority over one or two minors other than the claim, respectively;

2. The trial expenses shall be borne by the respondent.

The text of paragraph (1) is as follows.

According to the purport of each statement and pleading of Gap evidence Nos. 1-2 (each certified family register) and Gap evidence Nos. 3 (written inquiry of facts) which are presumed to have been established as a public document, the defendant raised the non-claim Nos. 1 to 30 January 30, 1969, and the non-claim Nos. 2 to 2 on April 15, 1971, respectively. However, since the defendant left for 3 suicide and 1 other claims No. 2 and the non-claim No. 2 on April 1972, 197, the defendant can be recognized that there is no formula for ten years until now since the non-claim No. 1 and the non-claim No. 2 were released.

Therefore, the respondent is not able to exercise the parental authority over the non-party 1 and 2 of the minor's claim. Thus, the non-party 1 and the non-party 2's non-party 1 and the non-party 2's non-party 2's appeal of this case shall be accepted as reasonable, and the costs of the trial shall be assessed as ordered by

Judges Lee Young-young (Presiding Judge)