1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a citizen of the United States of America, and the defendant is a citizen of the Republic of Korea.

After completing the marriage report on October 8, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendant had C [U.S. Name D] as a minor.

B. A foreign court’s judgment, etc. (1) On July 18, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking divorce with the Defendant at the Guam High Court (Case No. DM-0376-16), and Guam High Court accepted the Plaintiff’s claim for divorce on July 25, 2017, and rendered a final judgment, such as an intermediate judgment and [Attachment No. 2] written in [Attachment No. 1] written order, and written order. 2] On March 28, 2018, the Defendant filed an application for the revocation of recognition of the said substitute judgment with the Guam High Court, but Guam High Court rejected the said application on June 28, 2018 (hereinafter “instant decision”).

3) On July 12, 2018, when the Defendant did not comply with the interim judgment and the final judgment of the Guam High Court, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Guam High Court to order the Defendant to vindicate the grounds for the Defendant’s statutory maternity, and accordingly, the Guam High Court issued the same order as the written order (attached Form 3) after the examination related to the statutory maternity on October 29, 2018. [The grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, the entries (including the temporary number, hereinafter the same shall apply) in Gap-1 through 3, and 5 evidence (including the temporary number, hereinafter the same shall apply).

- The purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful

A. The Plaintiff is seeking a judgment of execution on the premise that the above intermediate judgment and the final judgment, and the order after the examination related to the legal maternity (hereinafter “instant judgment, etc.”) have become final and conclusive.

The defendant asserted that the judgment of this case does not meet the requirements for recognition and enforcement in Korea.

B. 1) The requirements prescribed by Article 217 of the Civil Procedure Act and Article 27 of the Civil Execution Act to be approved and executed by a foreign court in Korea, i.e., a final judgment of a foreign court or a judgment with the same effect recognized (hereinafter referred to as “final judgment”).