In a case where, during the continuance of a divorce lawsuit, the Plaintiff prepared a letter of commitment to withdraw the lawsuit and reversed his/her intention and wants to divorce at the time of the closing of argument at the fact-finding court, whether the lawsuit for divorce

In a case where the Plaintiff prepared a letter of undertaking to withdraw a lawsuit during the continuance of a divorce lawsuit and reversed his/her intention at the time of closing argument at the fact-finding court, the Family Litigation Act provides that the procedures for civil procedure shall apply mutatis mutandis to family litigation unless otherwise provided by special provisions, and it is interpreted that even in a judicial divorce lawsuit, the waiver of claims and the possibility of judicial compromise are possible. Thus, the effect of the withdrawal agreement cannot be deemed to be different from that of the civil lawsuit, and thus,

Article 12 of the Family Litigation Act, Articles 220 and 266 of the Civil Procedure Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Park Jong-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Plaintiff (Law Firm Name, Attorneys Limited-hee et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Defendant (Attorney Hong-hee et al., Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Principal of the case

September 19, 2006

1. All of the instant lawsuits are dismissed.

2. Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The plaintiff shall be divorced from the defendant. The plaintiff shall be designated as a person in parental authority and guardian of the principal of the case.

1. Facts of recognition;

The following facts may be acknowledged in this court by taking into account significant facts, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 3, the testimony of the non-party witness, and the overall purport of the pleadings.

A. The plaintiff and the defendant are legally married couple who reported their marriage on April 17, 1992, and have their children.

B. On November 24, 2005, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit on the ground that the Defendant maliciously deserted the Plaintiff and failed to fulfill the duty of cooperation as a husband and wife, and on January 1, 2006, the Plaintiff and the Defendant drafted at the Defendant’s home a letter of commitment that “the Plaintiff withdraws the lawsuit concerning the gold divorce lawsuit (2005da81468) prior to January 6, 2006, and until then the Plaintiff and the Defendant have a firm intention of divorce for two years, the Plaintiff shall, as far as possible, proceed with the divorce procedure. The Plaintiff waives the parental authority and fostering of the principal of the instant case, a child of the Plaintiff and the Defendant.”

C. At the defendant's office, the plaintiff prepared the above letter of commitment, followed by a brailler, and the principal of the case and play together with the defendant about 5:30 p.m. 30 p.m.

D. However, the Plaintiff asserted to the effect that the instant lawsuit had not been withdrawn until now, and that it would have sought divorce with the Defendant.

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

A. As the plaintiff and the defendant agreed to withdraw the lawsuit of this case on January 1, 2006, the plaintiff and the defendant asserted that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful as there is no benefit of protection of rights. The plaintiff's genuine intent should be absolutely respected as a result of significant influence on the status relationship. In the case of a judicial divorce claim, the decision of judicial divorce shall be based on the intention of the parties at the time of closing argument at the fact-finding court. Thus, even if the plaintiff prepared the above written statement of agreement, it shall be viewed that there is a benefit of protection of rights.

B. We examine the plaintiff on January 1, 2006, as seen earlier, since the plaintiff prepared a letter of undertaking with the defendant on January 1, 2006, the plaintiff agreed to withdraw the lawsuit of this case with the defendant. In case where the parties to the lawsuit agreed to withdraw the lawsuit outside of the lawsuit, such agreement shall be effective and the plaintiff's lawsuit shall be dismissed as there is no interest in protecting the rights of the plaintiff (see Supreme Court Decision 81Da1312, Mar. 9, 1982).

Of course, the withdrawal agreement is made after at least one month has passed since the filing of the lawsuit in this case, the contents of the lawsuit in this case are to be withdrawn until January 6, 2006, and the defendant's effort and intent to recover marriage is also important. Judicial divorce lawsuit is distinct from general civil litigation in its jurisdiction and procedure, etc. However, the Family Litigation Act governing judicial divorce lawsuit shall apply mutatis mutandis to family litigation unless otherwise provided in Article 12 of the Family Litigation Act (Article 12 of the Family Litigation Act), and it is interpreted that the waiver of the claim in this case and the settlement in court may be possible (see Article 12 of the Family Litigation Act, Article 220 of the Civil Procedure Act). In light of the special nature of the lawsuit in which a divorce lawsuit forms a status relationship, even if it is considered that it is a litigation forming a status relationship, the validity of the agreement to withdraw the lawsuit in this case cannot be viewed as different from the above civil litigation procedure.

Therefore, the defendant's defense of the above principal safety is justified.

C. As to this, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant’s family members, such as the Defendant’s mother and the Defendant’s her mother and the Defendant’s her mother were shaking the Plaintiff’s fat, forced and threatened the Defendant’s her bat, bating his bather bath, etc., and forced and threatened the Defendant’s bather bating, etc., and they would inevitably be cancelled by the delivery of the preparatory document as of January 16, 2006, and therefore, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff prepared the said promise due to the pressure of the Defendant and the Defendant’s family members, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is not acceptable.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is deemed to be an unlawful lawsuit that has no interest in protecting the rights of the plaintiff because the parties to the lawsuit have agreed to withdraw the lawsuit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Young-hun