In a case where Gap filed a divorce report based on a divorce judgment between Eul and Eul established in the district court located in the fourth Sea State in the United States of America, and completed the marriage report in Seoul, both of which were married, and obtained a marriage certificate from the registry of the fourth Sea State in the United States of America, and Eul sought confirmation of nullity of marriage between Gap and Byung, the case holding that the divorce report between Gap and Eul is null and void, and the marriage between Gap and Byung is null and void by applying the law of the fourth Sea State in the United States of America.

In a case where Gap filed a divorce report based on the judgment of divorce between Eul and Eul established in the district court located in the fourth Sea State in the United States of America, and Eul filed a divorce registration with the registry of the fourth Sea State in the United States of America and filed a marriage report with the registry of the registry of the marriage and submitted a certified copy of the marriage certificate to the head of the Seoul Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and Eul sought confirmation of nullity of marriage between Gap and Byung, the case held that the divorce report is null and void since the divorce between Eul and Eul was made based on the judgment obtained without the real intention of divorce between Eul and Eul, and therefore, the law of the country in which the validity of marriage is denied in a case where the law of the state of nationality of the parties is different with respect to the validity of middle divorce, and thus, the marriage between Gap and Byung is null and void by applying the law of the fourth sea state in the United States of America.

Article 36(1) of the Private International Act; Articles 810 and 816 subparag. 1 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff (Attorney Kim Jong-sung, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Defendant 1 and one other (Attorney Kim Byung-jin et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

May 16, 2014

1. On August 31, 201, the Defendants confirmed that the marriage between the Defendants was null and void by submitting a certified copy of the deed to the head of the Seoul Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on April 22, 2013, upon registering the marriage to the Dakman International Marriage Registry.

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

In the first place, the judgment like the order and in the second place, the marriage between the Defendants was revoked on August 31, 201 by submitting a certified copy of the certificate to the head of the Seoul Gangseo-gu Office on April 22, 2013, after registering the marriage with the Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Energy on August 31, 201.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff and defendant 1 are legally married couple who completed the marriage report on October 26, 1978, and they have become adult children.

B. Meanwhile, around 2007, Defendant 1 filed a divorce lawsuit against the Plaintiff on the grounds of a long-term separation from the Plaintiff, etc., and received the Seoul Family Court Decision 2007Ra45145, which was dismissed, and Defendant 1 continued to be separated from the Plaintiff and his children without returning home.

C. However, Defendant 1 filed a divorce report on August 11, 201 based on the divorce judgment between the Plaintiff and Defendant 1 at the District Court of the NANND on the grounds of the judgment of divorce between the Plaintiff and Defendant 1, and the said judgment of the NAND stated that the Plaintiff and Defendant 1 jointly applied for divorce and the judgment was rendered. Defendant 1 attached with the statement that the Plaintiff resided in the NANNR for six weeks, and that the Plaintiff agreed to divorce in the presence of a notary in the presence of a notary public in the NANRR, but there was no fact that the Plaintiff left the Republic of Korea only once after entering the Republic of Korea on June 6, 1995.

D. Meanwhile, on August 31, 201, immediately after the judgment of divorce was rendered, the Defendants married on August 31, 201, and submitted a certified copy of the marriage document prepared by the U.S. N. N.N.N.-N. Mar. 22, 2013 to the head of the Seoul Gangseo-gu. Upon completing the marriage report stated in the purport of the claim.

【Reasons for Recognition: Evidence No. 1 to 6, Evidence No. 7-1 to 3, Evidence No. 8-1 to 3, Evidence No. 9 through 17, and the purport of the whole pleadings】

2. Determination

A. According to the facts found earlier, it is reasonable to view that the divorce reported between the Plaintiff and the Defendant to the head of the Seoul Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on April 18, 2013 based on the divorce judgment rendered by the District Court of the fourth Sea of the United States and the Defendant was based on the judgment obtained by deceit without the Plaintiff’s genuine intention of divorce, and thus, the divorce report between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is null and void. Accordingly, the marriage report stated in the purport of the claim between the Defendants

B. Meanwhile, the case for which the plaintiff sought invalidation of the marriage stated in the purport of the claim between the defendants on the ground that the marriage between defendant 1 and defendant 2 of U.S. nationality falls under the middle marriage between the defendants and the defendant 2 of Korean nationality is subject to the so-called conflict of law. Furthermore, Article 36 (1) of the Private International Law provides that the actual requirements for the establishment of the marriage, including the grounds for nullity or revocation of the marriage, which is an obstacle to the establishment of the marriage, shall be governed by the law of nationality of each party. Thus, the validity of the report of marriage stated in the purport of the claim against the defendant 1 and the defendant 2 shall be determined in accordance with the law

C. However, the provisions of the Civil Act of the Republic of Korea provide for the grounds for the revocation of marriage, and, in principle, the laws of the Republic of Korea of the Republic of Korea of the Republic of Korea of the Republic of Korea of the Republic of Korea of the Republic of Korea of the Republic of Korea of the Republic of Korea of the Republic of Korea of the Republic of Korea of the Republic of Korea of

D. Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the marriage stated in the purport of the claim between the Defendants is null and void by applying the U.S. four sea states law, which has more denied the validity of intermediate divorce.

E. As to this, even though Defendant 1 expressed his intention to reach a settlement and a ruling on several occasions, and the Plaintiff’s and Defendant 1’s marriage were not accepted, and thus, the Plaintiff and Defendant 1’s marriage had already been terminated. However, the Plaintiff’s filing of the instant lawsuit solely on the basis of a clerical error or retaliation to inflict pain on Defendant 1, and is contrary to the principle of good faith. However, even if the marriage relationship between Defendant 1 and the Plaintiff on the basis of a foreign judgment taken place with Defendant 2 living together with Defendant 2, even if the marriage relationship between Defendant 1 and Defendant 1 has occurred, the Plaintiff’s filing of the lawsuit in this case is against the principle of good faith. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s filing of the lawsuit in this case cannot be accepted.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the above marriage in the purport of the claim between the Defendants is null and void, and there is a benefit to seek confirmation in order to address the apprehension of legal status that may arise from the erroneous entry in the family relations register to the Plaintiff, who is the legal spouse of Defendant 1. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all

Judges Suyang-hee