2012dern 14458 Confirmation of Denial or the existence of paternity

A person shall be appointed.

2. B

A person shall be appointed.

March 21, 2013

April 16, 2013

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

It is confirmed that there is no parental relation between the plaintiffs and the defendant.

1. Basic facts

On February 18, 2005, the Plaintiffs agreed to adopt the Defendant (the Defendant’s parents at that time renounced parental authority over the Defendant) who was under childcare at the Korea Child Counseling Center at the Korea Child Welfare Association, and on the same day, reported the birth of the Defendant, and had the Defendant registered the Defendant as the natural father of the Plaintiffs in the family relations register as of February 18, 2005, and thereafter have raised the Defendant as their children until now.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1-1, 2, Gap evidence Nos. 3 through 6, and 8, investigation report by family affairs investigators, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

The plaintiffs now are not good in their health and economic conditions, and they seek confirmation that there is no parental relation between the plaintiffs and the defendant in lieu of judicial dissolution, by asserting that it is necessary for the defendant to send the defendant to a higher child care center or facility for the future, because the defendant suffers from ADD (a lack of due diligence disorder) and urology symptoms, etc., and the plaintiffs are not capable of properly fostering the defendant.

A report of the birth of a natural parent as the intent of the parties to establish a adoptive parent relationship, and if the adoption satisfies all the substantial requirements, the adoption takes effect even if the adoption was made in such a form, and, except that the adoptive parent relationship can be resolved by the dissolution of the adoptive parent relationship, it has the same contents as that of the adoptive parent. Therefore, a false report of the birth of a natural parent in this case has the function of reporting the adoption of the adoptive parent relationship to the public. In such a case, barring special circumstances, such as where it is necessary to resolve the adoptive parent relationship by the dissolution of the adoptive parent relationship, the claim for the confirmation of the existence of the biological parent relationship to deny the existence of the legal parent relationship is not permissible (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 200Meu1493 delivered on May 24, 200). According to the above recognition, although the defendant was not born among the plaintiffs, the parent's father did not act as the natural father with the child care institution under the agreement between the plaintiffs and the adoptive parent, and the adoption relationship between the defendant and the adoptive parent was established.

이 사건에서 원고들과 피고 사이에 양친자관계를 계속하기 어려운 중대한 사유가 있어 파양에 의하여 양친자관계를 해소할 필요가 있는지에 관하여 보건대, 갑 제8호증의 기재와 가사조사관의 조사보고서의 기재에 의하면, 원고 B이 2010. 8. 경 위암 진단을 받아 2010. 10. 경 위 ( 胃 ) 절제 수술을 받았고, 원고 A는 이 사건 소송계속 중인 2012 .

10. ADD diagnosis around August 201, the defendant is frequently receiving aviation cancer treatment. The defendant undergoes mental treatment as a result of occurrence of magnetic disorder around November 201. On or around May 201, it can be recognized that the current status of management, such as insulin therapy and meal provision, is necessary after undergoing a diagnosis of urine, but the defendant's family affairs investigator's statement in his report of investigation and arguments can be acknowledged as follows. In other words, the defendant's family affairs investigator's statement in his family affairs investigation and arguments that "it would be better to do so," and the defendant's family affairs investigator's statement that it would not want dissolution of the relation with the defendant's child. It seems that the plaintiff B is more likely that the defendant's child will not have any other reason for birth or continuous operation of the market or work for the defendant's children as well as the defendant's children's children's children's children's ability to grow up to 8 years without any other reason for birth or continuous adoption of the defendant's children.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiffs' lawsuit of this case is unlawful and thus it is decided as per Disposition.

Judge Goh Sung