The case holding that it is difficult to view that it is desirable for the welfare of B to change the Eul's surname and origin, in case where A sought to change the Eul's surname and origin to his father's surname and origin to his father's surname and origin

It is the case that Gap sought to change Eul's performance and origin to his father's surname and origin.

In light of the fact that Eul still has only one year old, and the mother's sex, origin and child's sex and origin are different, and the sex and origin of Eul do not seem to have any special difficulty in the school life or social life, it is necessary to judge more carefully and promptly, and it is difficult to view that changing the nature and origin of Eul is desirable for the welfare of Eul.

Article 781(6) of the Civil Act

Claimant

Principal of the case

The claim of this case is dismissed.

It shall be permitted to change the nature of the principal of the case to “(B)”, and the principal to “Gyeongju(B)”.

The claimant is seeking to change the outcome and origin of the case to the surname and origin of the case's father's friendly surname and origin.

The change of the child’s surname and origin is recognized when it is necessary to change the child’s surname and origin for the welfare of the child. In determining whether the change of the child’s surname and origin is necessary for the welfare of the child, various factors, such as the need to protect the relationship between the father and the child, the identity of the child as a family member, the intention of the child, age and maturity of the child, the nature of the child, the motive for applying for the change of the surname and origin of the child, and delinquency

In this case, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the records, i.e., ① the principal of this case is still one year old and lacks the ability to determine his/her intention with respect to the change of the principal of this case, ② the mother’s sex, origin and child are generally different from the sex and origin of the principal of this case, so it does not seem that the principal of this case does not have any special difficulty in school life or social life due to the difference between the applicant’s sex, origin and the principal’s sex and origin. ③ Even if the head of this case’s family system was abolished and the family register was changed to the principal of this case’s performance, even if the concept of family register was lost due to the abolition of the head of this case’s family system, the non-party’s family relation certificate was maintained and the non-party’s family relation certificate was stated as the father’s father and the non-party. ④ After the claimant’s divorce on May 15, 2017, the applicant of this case did not have any possibility to change his/her family relation at the time of this case’s request for marriage and welfare.

Therefore, the claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Jeong-hee