Where an adoptive parent with the nationality of the United States of America abandons an adopted child with the nationality of the Republic of Korea and his/her whereabouts are concealed, the applicable law to the adjudication on dissolution of adoptive relations among them.

In the case of the United States of America, the adoption strictly limits the requirements of adoption and does not have a dissolution system, instead of extinguishing the parent-child relationship between the adopted child and his natural parents, so if the adoption was made between the adoptive parent A with the nationality of the United States and the adopted child with the nationality of the Republic of Korea, the adoptive parent relationship between them shall be null and void. However, if the above Gap abandons the above Eul after adoption and abandons his whereabouts, and the above Eul is being raised under the protection of the biological mother, maintaining the remaining adoptive parent-child relationship would result in the violation of the public order and good morals of Korea. Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the law applicable to the adjudication on the dissolution of adoptive relation between the above Gap and Eul as the Civil Code of Korea.

Article 21 and Article 5 of the Conflict of Laws, Article 905 No. 5 of the Civil Act

Claimant

appellees

1. The appellant and the appellee shall be dissolved;

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

The same shall apply to the order.

In full view of the overall purport of testimony and hearing by non-party 1 in the statement of 1,2 (each family register copy) in which each authenticity is presumed to have been established, the respondent, who is a citizen of the Republic of Korea, may recognize the adoption of the claimant who is a citizen of the Republic of Korea on September 13, 1976 by the law of the Republic of Korea (as for the evidence No. 1 in the above evidence, the respondent is indicated as a citizen of the Republic of Korea, but this seems to be a clerical error in the Austria).

However, the appeal for dissolution of the case against the respondent with the nationality of the Republic of Korea is a case belonging to the so-called interference legal relationship. First of all, the dissolution of the case shall be governed by the law of the United States of America as the adoptive parent of the adoptive parent, and the dissolution of the case shall be governed by the law of the State of origin of the adoptive parent of the adoptive parent of the United States. In particular, since the United States is a different country according to its region as it is different from each other, it shall be governed by Article 2 (3) of the Conflict of Laws Act. However, although there is a little difference in the case of the United States of America, it is somewhat different according to the region, but the adoption of the adoption of the United States, instead of strictly limiting the requirements for the adoption, the adoption of the relationship between both natural parents and the adoptive parent of the United States, and such attitude seems to be identical to the ASEAN State of the Republic of Korea as the claimant for dissolution of the case may not be dissolved under the law of the Republic of Korea and the adoptive parent of the Republic of Korea.

Furthermore, in full view of the following facts: (a) as to the existence of the grounds for dissolution of adoptive relation, the above Gap evidence Nos. 1-2 and public documents, each statement of evidence Nos. 1-2 (resident registration record card) presumed to be genuine, and the purport of testimony and deliberation by Gap Nos. 2 (resident registration record card) presumed to be genuine, the defendant would adopt the defendant's adoption with the consent of the non-party No. 1, who was stationed in the Republic of Korea as at the time of the adoption of the claimant to the non-party No. 1 who was the birth mother of the claimant to the United States Armed Forces at the time of adoption of the claimant, and the defendant would have adopted the defendant's adoption with the consent of the non-party No. 1, who was the birth mother of the claimant to the United States. However, the defendant did not notify the non-party No. 1 and the applicant of his whereabouts until now

Thus, the above facts constitute grounds for judicial dissolution under Article 905 subparagraph 5 of the Civil Code. Thus, the appeal of this case by the claimant for this reason shall be justified, and the trial costs shall be judged as per Disposition at the defendant's expense.

Judges Lee Jae-chul et al. (Presiding Judge)