In a case where Party A, who married with Party B, adopted Party B as the full adoption of Party B’s parent’s child while married with Party B, and thereafter Party A, applied for permission to adopt Party B as his or her child, the case holding that it is difficult to accept the above application.

In a case where: (a) A, who was born by marriage with B, was born as his child; (b) was adopted as the full adoption of C, due to difficulties in fostering, etc. while married with B; and (c) subsequently, A and C were married with B and planned to work in a foreign country for the future and applied for permission for adoption of C, the case holding that A’s adoption of C, without having the full adoption relationship, goes beyond the rationality on the family relations register because (a) the adoption of C, in fact, was made by the birth of her father and her mother, was made by the birth of her father and her mother; and (b) there was a procedure for adoption or full adoption of C, making it difficult for her applicant to accept his application.

Article 867 of the Civil Act

Claimant 1 and one other

Principal of the case

The claim of this case is dismissed.

On January 12, 2007, the claimant 2 married to Nonparty 1, who is the biological father of the principal of the case, and filed a report of birth with his father. However, on April 30, 2007, the claimant 2 adopted the principal of the case into the full adoption of his father on April 29, 2009 due to the divorce and divorce with Nonparty 1 and the difficulties in fostering. On February 5, 2014, the claimant 1 and marriage, among the petitioners planned their lives in the future head of the household, they want to care for the principal of the case to take the principal of the case to the head of the household as their father, and request the adoption of the principal of the case as their father.

The reason for the application in this case to the effect that 2, who is the biological mother of the principal of this case, shall guide the last day of the principal of this case to the applicant 1 who has dealt with the new family, and with his consent, will fully play a role as the mother of the principal of this case, is positive and consistent with the welfare of the principal of this case.

However, the positive purpose should be achieved through reasonable and reasonable procedures, and the family relation register should be operated in accordance with the reasonable criteria of general application to all the citizens. The adoption of the principal of this case without having such relation is difficult for all the petitioners to accept their applications, and the adoption of the principal of this case is practically made by the adoption of the father and the mother's mother in the family relation register, and is virtually made by the father and the father's mother's mother's mother in the family relation register. After finding the status of the principal of this case through judicial dissolution of dissolution, there are considerable procedures for the claimant 2 to adopt the principal of this case through adoption or full adoption (this relation is also difficult for the claimant 2 to recover the relationship with the non-party 1 who is the biological father and it is also difficult for the claimant 2 to guarantee the rights of the birth father with respect to the personal affairs and welfare of the principal of this case. Furthermore, it is difficult for the claimant to accept their applications for full adoption, and it is difficult for the defendant to ultimately start the adoption of the principal of this case without being able to meet the above procedures.

Therefore, the application for the adoption of this case is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judge Gosck-scam