가사소송법 개정의 방향과 과제

The purpose of this study is to present an overall direction of the Family Litigation Act’s revision, albeit partially. Since its establishment in 1990 as a special law applying to general family cases, the current Family Litigation Act has not been generally reviewed for more than 20 years. Only some partial revisions for the Family Litigation Act and the Rules on Family Litigation have been conducted in accordance with several partial revisions of the Family Law. The purpose of this revision of the Family Litigation Act is to complete a unified law for procedures of family cases which is progressive and self-contained. In specific, I suggest that the following regulations be revised or newly established. Object clauses of the Family Litigation Act must be modified so that the Act is up-to-date and appropriate for its purpose as an adjective law. The Family Litigation Act does not include regulations on basic responsibility of the Family Court and the parties during procedures of family cases. Considering the self-contained nature of the Family Litigation Act, it is desirable to establish separate provisions rather than to partially apply the Civil Procedure Act. The current Family Litigation Act contradicts itself when differentiating family cases, and it may be appropriate to categorize family cases by types. The current Family Litigation Act includes only 73 law items even when it serves as the prescribed consolidation on family non-litigation and family conciliation procedures as well as family litigation procedures, relying on other laws or widely delegating family case procedures to family litigation rules. It is necessary to modify legal terminations and rules. In terms of legislative theory, it is desirable that requests for reading or copying records are approved in principle, while criteria should be clarified for exceptions where such requests are denied, and also that the right of appeal of dissatisfaction should be prepared in the cases of non-approval. The current Family Litigation Act becomes ineffective because it does not admit executive force in advance decision. Thus, it is necessary to put the regulation of admitting executive force in advance decision in the Family Litigation Act. Now, international family cases are on the increase due to the expansion of international exchanges due to developments in science and technology, especially those of transportation and communication, requiring establishment of regulations on international family case procedures in the Family Litigation Act.