A child born out of wedlock who was raised by the birth mother alone sued the birth father after becoming an adult, demanding "payment of past support." The birth father countered that "I already reached an agreement with the birth mother not to bear child support." But the first trial, the appeals court, and the Supreme Court all ruled in favor of the child born out of wedlock, according to reports on the 13th. What did the court decide?
A was born in Jan. 2001 to birth father B, who was married, and birth mother C, who was unmarried. In May of the same year, B reached an agreement with C that read: "On the condition of breaking up, child support for son A will be 800,000 won per month; 10 million won by Mar. 2002; 30 million won by May 2004; and no child support thereafter. B will not see A."
C then filed a lawsuit in Sept. of the same year against B to claim the settlement money. The case ended in mediation. It stated, "A's legal guardian and custodian shall be the birth mother, and the birth father shall not bear any burden of child-rearing, including child support." Afterward, birth mother C raised A alone, and birth father B reportedly never met A.
A's child support issue returned to court in Aug. 2020. After becoming an adult (age 19), A sued birth father B to have A recognized as a legal child and also sought past child support. During the lawsuit, a DNA test reportedly found that A should be regarded as B's biological child.
The first and second trials ruled that B must pay A 70 million won in child support. But B, saying he could not accept the rulings, took the case to the Supreme Court. B argued that earlier court mediation exempted him from the burden of child support.
However, the Supreme Court reached the same conclusion as the first and second trials. The Supreme Court's First Division (presiding Justice Ma Yong-ju) dismissed B's appeal on Sept. 11, saying, "Even if the birth mother and birth father of a child born out of wedlock agreed to waive child support, if it runs counter to the child's welfare, its effect cannot be deemed to extend to the child."
The Supreme Court also said, "Once a paternity judgment recognizing a child born out of wedlock as a legal child becomes final, the (parents') duty of support is retroactive to the time of birth, and this does not change even if the child born out of wedlock received support from only one parent until reaching adulthood."
It went on, "Absent special circumstances—such as having received sufficient support from one parent alone to a degree commensurate with the living standard of both parents—a child born out of wedlock may claim past support for the period of minority from the parent who did not raise the child."
An attorney specializing in divorce cases said, "This decision substantively protects the rights of children born outside marriage, and similar claims for support may increase going forward."