Report of birth as a natural father and whether it is effective as an adoption

The court below's decision is justified in rejecting the respondent's assertion that the adoption took effect by the report of birth on the ground that (a) other than the claimant (the respondent is under 15 years of age) has an intention to adopt the respondent, or (b) other than the claimant has no evidence to support the fact that (a) other than the claimant had an intention to adopt the respondent, or that (a) other than the claimant has consented to the adoption, on the ground that there is no evidence to support the fact that (a) other than the claimant had an intention to adopt the respondent, or that (b) other than the claimant has consented to the adoption, the adoption became effective by the report of birth.

Article 869 of the Civil Act

Appellee-Appellant Kim Sung-sung, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Appellant Kim Jong-il, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Daegu High Court Decision 81Reu10 delivered on June 29, 1982

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the appellee.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below rejected the fact that the deceased non-party 1 was registered as a child born on January 17, 1947 between the deceased non-party 1 and the deceased non-party 2, and he was married to the deceased non-party 1 and was unable to give birth to the deceased non-party 1, and thus, the deceased non-party 3, who was the legal wife of the report, could not claim birth immediately after the birth, and thus, the deceased non-party 2 was found to have taken care of the defendant's house and taken care of the deceased non-party 1, who was born between the deceased non-party 1 and his natural father, and the deceased non-party 3 as the deceased non-party 1, who was born the birth report, and it cannot be concluded that the deceased non-party 1 and the adoptive parent of the deceased did not have any intention to claim birth relation between the deceased non-party 3 and the deceased non-party 15, and thus, the adoption relation was not established between the deceased non-party 1 and the deceased.

2. If the parties have an obvious intent to establish a adoptive relationship between them and if the requirements for adoption are met, it shall be interpreted that the adoption is effective without filing an adoption report, even if there are errors in the form or procedure of the adoption, such as the birth report, as in the instant case, etc. However, since the family register aims to disclose their personal relationship on the family register and prevent confusion and dispute in advance, the establishment of a personal relationship on the family register provides for the requirements to comply with such requirements. Thus, an act that does not meet such requirements is null and void, since the adoption provides for the conditions of adoption under Article 266 of the Civil Act, it shall not be said that the adoption does not meet the substantial requirements.

In this regard, the court below's rejection of the defendant's assertion on the ground that there is no evidence to acknowledge the defendant's intent to establish a adoptive relationship between the parties, such as that the defendant was intended to adopt the defendant to the non-party 3, or the defendant was under the age of 15, at the time, and that the non-party 2, who was the defendant, consented to the adoption, and there was no clear consent, etc., the court below's rejection of the defendant's assertion is just, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence, misapprehension of legal principles, or misunderstanding of facts in the process leading to this conclusion, and there

3. Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed, and the costs of the appeal shall be assessed against the losing party and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee Il-young (Presiding Justice)