Method of obtaining status as the natural father of a person out of wedlock

The denial of paternity between a child born out of wedlock and a father may take place only by the recognition of the father, so the respondent, who is a child born out of wedlock, intends to obtain the status of the claimant as the father of the child, must be recognized by the claimant, and the denial of paternity between the claimant and the respondent does not take place, unless there is any evidence that

Article 855 of the Civil Act

Claimant

appellees

Gwangju High Court Decision 84Reu13 delivered on June 5, 1984

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Gwangju High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below acknowledged that the respondent was registered as the natural father of the claimant and the defendant's special representative, and that the non-party 1 entered into a matrimonial relationship with the claimant from June 30, 1978 to April 198 and living together with the non-party 2 on the non-party 2 on the ground that the relationship with the claimant was reversed during August 14, 1981, and the defendant was forged, and the non-party 1 got married between the claimant and the non-party 1 on the part of the claimant and the non-party 1 on the ground that the defendant was born as the natural father of the claimant and the non-party 1 on the birth report and the birth report were entered as the claimant's natural father at the same time, but the above fact that the above marriage became null and void by the judgment of the court is not sufficient to conclude that the respondent is not the claimant's natural father and there is no other evidence to support this.

However, since the denial of paternity between a person other than marriage and a father takes place only by the recognition of the father, the respondent, who is a child other than marriage, must be aware of the claimant in order to obtain the status of the claimant as the father of the child, and there is no evidence to prove that there was such recognition, the denial of paternity between the claimant and the respondent shall not take place. Even if Nonparty 1, as determined by the court below, based on the report of birth, forged the seal of the claimant, puts on the register of the claimant as the claimant and indicated the same effect as that of recognition, the respondent was registered in the register of the claimant as the claimant, but the report of recognition is not made without the consent of the claimant, and it shall not take effect as the recognition. Accordingly, the above fact recorded in the family register alone cannot be said to have taken place between the claimant and the respondent, and there is no legal relation between the claimant and the respondent.

The decision of the court below on the premise that the claimant is liable to prove that the respondent who is a child born out of wedlock is not his natural father is not his natural father is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the denial of paternity with the father of a child born out of wedlock.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court which is the original judgment. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kang Jin-young (Presiding Justice)