(영문) 부산가정법원 2019.10.23.선고 2018르21238 판결

A. The plaintiff's mother's father's father's father's father's father's father's father's father's father's father's resistant relation with the deceased. The plaintiff's mother's father

○ The Plaintiff gave birth to the Plaintiff, and without specifying ○○○ and her father on 1981, the report of birth against the Plaintiff was filed.

B. Since then, the exchange between workers and the deceased was severed, and the Plaintiff was not aware of the consciousness, the Plaintiff was fluenced by the deceased’s past work, etc., but the deceased was already aware of the death of the deceased. On December 2015, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit on January 17, 2016.

C. In the sexual chronsome genetic testing conducted between the deceased and the plaintiff, the 13 gene parts of the 16 gene parts are identical, but the 3 gene parts are inconsistent, so it has been presumed that the blood relationship by the same chronology is not established.

D. Meanwhile, in the genetic testing of the upper chronological body conducted between the deceased, including the Defendant’s Intervenor’s Intervenor, and the Plaintiff, there were reasonable results for the parent-child relationship in the Plaintiff, the deceased, and both sides, and there was no confirmation of the opinion that the gene type of the deceased is inconsistent with the parent-child relationship even in those genes where it is difficult to specify the gene type of the deceased. When calculating the degree of the possibility of father-child relationship only for 12 genes that could have been specified in the deceased’s gene type, the father-child relationship was 6,496.841) and the father-child rate was 99.

【Ground of recognition】 1 to 7 and 9 evidence; the result of the commission of appraisal to the school rooms of the law of the Seoul National University at the first instance court; the result of the commission of appraisal to the school rooms of the law of the Seoul National University at the Seoul National University at the first instance court; the fact-finding and reply to the school rooms of the law of the Korea National University at

2. Determination

In light of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to see that the deceased is the father of the plaintiff in light of the above facts of recognition, the evidence mentioned above, and the purport of the entire arguments.

① In a case where the Plaintiff wishes to find her father’s father’s father by attending a marriage ceremony with the deceased, etc., he was in an internal relationship with the deceased by attending a marriage ceremony with her mother, and even when she tried to find her father’s father’s father’s father’s father, she accurately memoryed the deceased’s personal information and claimed for recognition. As seen above, the circumstance in which the Plaintiff specified the deceased as her father’s father and filed the instant lawsuit is natural, and there is no reason to identify the deceased as her father’s father’s father by falsity.

② At present, the deceased and the only male lineal descendant of the deceased were deceased and could not conduct a sexual chronological test. Ultimately, the deceased’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’

③ As to this, the Defendant Intervenor asserts that the genetic test of the upper chrone is not correct, and that the blood relationship by the same father was not established in the genetic test of the deceased’s chrone between the deceased and the Plaintiff, and that the Plaintiff is not the natural father of the deceased. However, in the case of this case, the Plaintiff’s 13 genetic elements are identical from the genetic test of the sexual chrone, and the remaining three genetic elements are also different + 1-1. The difference is not less than 90% of the chrone’s chrone’s chrone’s chrone’s chrone’s chrone’s chrone’s 9%. Furthermore, the Plaintiff’s 6 genetic test of the deceased’s chrone’s chrone’s chrone’s 4 was not widely used, and thus, the Plaintiff’s 6 genetic test of the deceased’s chrone’s 9% test should not be conducted.

3. Conclusion

If so, the plaintiff's claim for recognition should be accepted, and the judgment of the court of first instance is justifiable with this conclusion. Therefore, the appeal by the defendant's assistant intervenor is dismissed as it is without merit.