Whether res judicata effect of a lawsuit seeking confirmation of non-existence of paternity also affects a claim for recognition (negative)

In a claim for confirmation of non-existence of paternity, even though the non-existence of paternity was filed against the claimant and the non-party (A) who is interested on the ground that the non-party (B) is entered in the family register as if he/she was not the natural father’s relationship, and the judgment of non-existence of paternity became final and conclusive, the judgment does not affect the claim for recognition of paternity of this case.

Articles 863 and 865 of the Civil Act

Attorney Lee In-bok et al., Counsel for defendant

A co-inspector;

1. As to the Defendant’s Intervenor’s Intervenor

Daegu High Court Decision 82Reu24 delivered on June 29, 1982

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the supplementary intervenor.

The defendant's supplementary intervenor's grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below, based on the following evidence, acknowledged the fact that the non-party 1 was aware of the deceased non-party 2 as a multi-party employee around July 1973, and became aware of the deceased non-party 2. From December of this year, since the deceased non-party 2's aid, the non-party 1 was pregnant with the claimant around June 14, 1974, and the plaintiff was delivered to the deceased non-party 2 at the crew's mother and the council member around March 14, 1975, the deceased non-party 2 entered the plaintiff's name as a "resident" as a son, and the plaintiff was not a child born out of the deceased non-party 2's marriage. In light of the above facts, the court below's claim for recognition of the non-existence of the paternity relation cannot be viewed as a violation of the rules of evidence or the non-existence of the legal relation between the plaintiff and the non-existence of the claim in this case.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Jung-soo (Presiding Justice) and Lee Jong-young's Lee Jong-young