이혼 후 혼인무효확인의 소와 확인의 이익

초록

The plaintiff (a woman) filed a divorce action against the defendant (a man), and an agreement of divorce was reached between the parties. Accordingly, the parties registered their divorce around 2004. Afterwards, the plaintiff claimed that she had no intention of getting married at the time of marriage or that she was forced into the marriage and sought action for declaration of nullity of marriage (circumstantial claim) and annulment of the marriage (preliminary claim). In the Supreme Court decision 2020meu15896 issued on May 23, 2024 (hereinafter referred to as the Supreme Court decision 2020meu15896), it was ruled that if the marriage has already been dissolved by divorce, the marital relationship becomes a legal relationship which has already ended. Numerous legal relationships are formed based on the marital relationship, which is a relationship based on status. Rather than repeating the process of seeking the invalidity of each relationship, nullity of marriage provides an effective and appropriate means of resolving related disputes at once by seeking confirmation of the invalidity of the past marital relationship itself. The court recognized legal interest of confirmation even after the marriage relationship had already been dissolved, unless there are special circumstances not to recognize such benefit. This article conducted research in the following sequence to determine the validity of the Supreme Court decision 2020meu15896. First, as a prerequisite for reviewing the issue in depth, the discussions in Korea on the nullity of marriage and the legal interest of confirmation regarding past legal relationships are briefly examined, focusing on the issue of the Supreme Court decision 2020meu15896. Second, the trend of lower court rulings, including the previous Supreme Court rulings, was identified. At the same time, the status of discussions on the nullity of marriage and the legal interest of confirmation in the Korean academia was examined. The Supreme Court's decision of 78meu7 on July 11, 1978, recognized the legal interest of confirmation if the marriage has already been dissolved by divorce. On the other hand, since the Supreme Court decision 82meu67 issued on February 28, 1984, denied the legal interest of confirmation, it is necessary to analyze the relationship between the two decisions along with the reasoning of the two decisions. Since the rulings of the lower courts are not consistent with one another, it is necessary to review the reasoning of the courts. Third, to review the issue from a comparative legal perspective, I explored the discourse in Japan on whether the legal interest of confirmation is recognized in an action for the nullity of marriage filed after the dissolution of marriage. The discussions in Japan on nullity of marriage are not only similar to the discussions in Korea, but there are many theories and precedents in Japan we may refer to, relative to other countries, regarding the existence or non-existence of past relationships and the validity of past legal acts and whether the legal interest of confirmation may be recognized in an action of nullity of marriage. Fourth, based on the review above, the validity of Supreme Court decision 2020meu15896 was analyzed.

키워드