Choe Sang Hun has written another interesting article on the legal problem facing North Koreans that defect to South Korea. Though a North Korean might become a citizen of South Korea and hold a passport, it seems that South Korean judges will not issue a divorce to any that wish to divorce a spouse that was left behind in North Korea.
As Choe points out, the relevant question is:
should South Korea even recognize a marriage sealed in North Korea, given that the South’s Constitution calls the North part of its territory, and that such marriages are typically never registered in the South? With spouses on opposing sides of the border, which court should have jurisdiction? How can a spouse in North Korea defend his or her interests in a South Korean court?
Go here for the article.
{ 2 trackbacks }
{ 14 comments… read them below or add one }
An entrepreneur with the right legal know-how might come up with a weekend getaway divorce/marriage in Japan or the Philippines. If they could make a million won off only a few hundred couples, it’d be a good side business.
This really is a new one. The key problem is “spouse left behind in North Korea”. Legal proceedings would seem to require service of process on the other party (i.e. delivery of communication that proceedings are underway in a Korean district court), or for the court to declare the other party dead.
There are some ways to get a “quickie divorce” — for example, Guam is a divorce haven — but all of them require uncontested divorce as proved by a written consent from the spouses.
Communications between the outside world and North Korea are therefore the problem.
However, over at DPRK Studies, James J. Na left a comment to the effect that “commie marriages” should be no good (i.e. invalid) under South Korea’s “capitalist” law. Setting aside for the moment the question whether South Korea is indeed a capitalist society, Mr. Na is probably correct to question whether South Korean courts should be respecting the legality North Korean marriages. Formally — that is to say, by the Constitution of the Republic of Korea — South Korean laws apply to the whole of the territory of the Korean Peninsula. Marriage registration by the courts or other public authorities of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea should have no more legal effect here than “registration” of a “marriage” before some student-revolutionary committee at Seoul National University.
In which case, defectors don’t need divorces – not legally anywa; and it’s sad that they are reaching out to the State for a ritual to stamp paid on their personal past and issue a ticket for a new personal life.
I can’t refer to any authority, but my view would be similar to Brendon’s. In fact my understanding is that this is pretty much the case for any “foreign” marriage not registered with the Seoul authorities, not just North Korea. I’m pretty sure I recall some case where a Korean married a Japanese in Japan and a Korean in Korea but could not be tried for bigamy because as the Japanese marriage had not been registered in Korea, it was not recognised by the authorities.
This can be observed when applying for an F-2 spouse visa. You have to provide the Korean family register recording the marriage, immigration will not accept a translated and notarised foreign marriage certificate.
You have to first take the translated and notarised marriage certificate and have it recorded on the Korean family register before the marriage is recognised by the authorities here.
In summary, they don’t need to get a divorce since they are officialy single!!
Per Brendon’s comment:
One must ask just whose party is it, South Korea’s or North Korea’s?
Perhaps this flexible mindset of the political and judicial system in South Korea, in their unwillingness to outright invalidate these marriages, is a foretaste of a more radical change in government, somewhere in the future, if the North and South ever negotiate unification. If that happens, it may mean that the hermit gets new clothes and many vices, once again, become virtues.
This brings new meaning to the term “geographical bachelor”
Brendon Wrote: “There are some ways to get a “quickie divorce” — for example, Guam is a divorce haven — but all of them require uncontested divorce as proved by a written consent from the spouses.”
Gerry Writes: It is hard for me to believe that anywhere could provide a “quickie divorce” any quicker than Korea.
Can Guam beat that?
By the way, after the divorce, I felt strange. Even though my wife and I had not really communicated much over the last ten years, I was sad because it felt like I was losing “a human bond.” It was not like I was losing a wife, but like I was losing a bond to one piece of the human race. It was not a good feeling. Even though I am not really religious, it felt like God was looking down on us and frowning.
Outside the courthouse, my wife and I looked at each other for a few seconds, gave each other a long hug, and then said, “Goodbye.”
Gerry, the issue is that you can’t get a divorce here, if they don’t recognise that you’re married in the first place….
“Is North Korean Law Binding in South Korea?”
I sure hope not. I once used a newspaper that had a picture of Kim Jong-il to line my cat’s litterbox.
Gerry, the problem is having the person from North Korea there to speak before the judge, or sign any documents, being notified, etc.
Though if a person can be added to a family register in the ROK having been born in the U.S. or wherever (in cases where U.S. citizens show up and get pressed into ROK military service), then a divorce should be no problem for the ROKG.
Speaking of Gerry, you may see what he looks like in true life form. Here he is, in the news.
http://times.hankooki.com/lpag.....211980.htm
Someguyinkorea #10, that is hilarious.
“Speaking of Gerry, you may see what he looks like in true life form. Here he is, in the news.
http://times.hankooki.com/lpag.....2211980.ht m ”
Yeah, what about those two jokers who left statements that basically argue that it’s dangerous to question the Korean side of the argument because no claims have been “proved yet”? How can one argue with that? If their aim was to leave foreign English teachers speechless, well, they certainly succeeded with me.
You must log in to post a comment.