▲ Birth Registration Form
The Supreme Court has ruled that correcting a child's birth date is a separate matter from determining paternity, allowing a parent to proceed with a correction even when it raises questions about legal parentage.
According to legal circles on July 2, the Supreme Court's Second Division (Justice Oh Kyung-mi presiding) overturned a lower court's decision that had denied a request by an individual, identified as A, to correct her child's date of birth in the family register.
A gave birth to a child with B in 2009 while separated from her then-husband, C, to whom she was legally married.
After her divorce from C was finalized five months after the child's birth, she registered her marriage to B the following year.
When A and B later registered the child's birth, they recorded the birth date as 2010.
As the discrepancy between the actual birth date and the registered date began to cause difficulties for the child, the parents filed a request with the court to correct the date in the family register to 2009.
The issue arose because correcting the birth date to the actual date would legally presume the child to be the offspring of the former husband, C.
Under the Civil Act, a child conceived during a marriage is presumed to be the husband's child.
The lower court had rejected the request, stating, "Correcting the child's birth date is a matter that could have significant implications for family and inheritance law regarding the parent-child relationship between the child, A, and C."
The lower court argued that a request to correct the family register could only be considered after obtaining a final court judgment confirming that the child is not C's biological offspring, such as through a paternity denial lawsuit or a confirmation of the non-existence of a parent-child relationship.
The Supreme Court reached a different conclusion.
The Supreme Court determined that correcting a birth date in the family register is a matter distinct from establishing paternity, and that if the birth date is incorrect, it should be corrected first.
The Supreme Court explained, "In cases where there is no direct legal procedure under the Family Litigation Act regarding entries in the family register, errors or omissions can be corrected. The Family Litigation Act does not provide a separate, direct method for litigating birth or death dates."
The court added, "Unless there are special circumstances, it is appropriate to view birth and death dates as subjects for correction under Article 104 of the Act on Registration of Family Relations," noting that this applies even if B is already listed as the biological father in the family register.
The Supreme Court concluded, "Since the lower court acknowledged that the child was born in 2009, it should have granted the request to correct the birth date in the family register," and remanded the case to the lower court for reconsideration.
(Photo: Yonhap News)
※
Copying, redistribution, and unauthorized use in AI training are strictly prohibited.