In a case where a divorce judgment between South and North Korea became final and conclusive and revoked by retrial, whether a claim for revocation of divorce becomes an abuse of rights solely on the grounds that, in such a case, whether a woman has no intention to continue the marital life in fact, or not, the third party of the marriage trust and the interest of the female or its children who are the third party of the marriage trust and good faith, etc. are significantly infringed (negative)

When Gap filed a divorce lawsuit against his wife and confirmed a favorable judgment, the divorce lawsuit was filed again by marriage with his wife, but the above divorce trial was finalized by an application for retrial on the ground of improper service by public notice based on the report of his false address, the marriage between his and his and her husband constitutes a middle marriage under Article 810 of the Civil Act, and the marriage between his and her husband constitutes a middle marriage under Article 810 of the Civil Act. Whether the woman actually has no intention to continue marital life, or not, the claim for revocation of divorce is not an abuse of right, solely on the grounds that the interests of the female and her children who are the third party in good faith who believed the above divorce trial is significantly infringed.

Articles 2, 810, and 816 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 85Meu35 delivered on September 10, 1985 (Gong1985, 1334) 86Meu74 delivered on January 20, 1987 (Gong1987, 367)

Appellant Kim Nam-soo, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant

Defendant 1 et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant-ho

Gwangju High Court Decision 87Reu2 delivered on February 10, 1989

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be assessed against the respondent.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, while the appellant and the respondent 1 were legally married couple, they filed a divorce judgment against the appellant on November 19, 1981, and the above judgment became final and conclusive, the divorce judgment of this case was married to the respondent 2 and reported again on July 14, 1983, but the above divorce judgment of this case became final and conclusive on May 27, 1986 by a request for retrial based on illegal public notice based on false address report as stated in the judgment of the claimant, and the above divorce judgment of this case became final and conclusive on May 27, 1986. The appellant stated that the marriage of this case between the respondent constitutes a middle divorce under Article 810 of the Civil Code. The appellant, in fact, rejected the respondent's defense that the revocation claim of this case was filed solely for the purpose of inducing the defendant's husband and wife, even though he did not have an intention to continue the marriage with the respondent 1, and revoked the marriage between the respondent.

In light of the records, it cannot be deemed that there was an error of violation of the rules of evidence against the facts alleged as arguments in the evidence and fact-finding of the court below, and whether the claimant has no intention to continue the marital life, or not, the reason that the defendant 2 or his children who is a bona fide third party who believed the above divorce adjudication and has been significantly infringed on the interests of the defendant 2 or his children, which is a bona fide third party who has married, cannot be deemed as abuse of rights. Therefore, it is not acceptable to criticize the judgment of the court

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

Justices Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)