Open Decision Ledger · Family & inheritance law
When a court may change an adult guardian
Supreme Court, Feb. 4, 2021, 2020Seu647 (ruling)
Case name: 성년후견인변경
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
What does 'a case in which it is recognised that a guardian must be changed for the welfare of the ward' in Article 940 of the Civil Act mean, and must both the property-management and the personal-protection duties be weighed when deciding whether a ground for change exists?
Holding
It is a case where, taking the guardian's performance of duty as a whole, there is reason to think the guardian has neglected the duty of a prudent manager and is unfit to serve, and where that unfitness affects the ward's welfare. Unless there are special circumstances, both the property-management duty and the duty to protect the person must be considered, because the personal-protection duty matters to the ward's welfare no less than managing property. On the facts, the court below misapplied that law and failed to examine what it needed to, when it ordered a change on the ground of continuing family conflict.
Summary of the holding, verbatim
성년후견인의 변경사유인 ‘피성년후견인의 복리를 위하여 후견인을 변경할 필요가 있다고 인정되는 경우’는 가정법원이 성년후견인의 임무수행을 전체적으로 살펴보았을 때 선량한 관리자로서의 주의의무를 게을리하여 후견인으로서 그 임무를 수행하는 데 적당하지 않은 사유가 있는 경우로서 그 부적당한 점으로 피후견인의 복리에 영향이 있는 경우라고 봄이 상당하다.
Unofficial English translation
'Where it is recognized that there is a need to change the guardian for the welfare of the adult ward,' which is a ground for changing an adult guardian, it is reasonable to regard it as a case where, when the Family Court has examined the performance of the adult guardian's duties in their entirety, there are grounds rendering the person unfit to perform the duties as a guardian by neglecting the duty of care of a good manager, and where such unfitness affects the welfare of the ward.
Disposition
Reversed and remanded Stated in the decision
원심결정을 파기하고, 사건을 창원지방법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The order of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Changwon District Court.
Form of the test
Elements stated Stated in the decision
그 변경의 요건은 ‘피성년후견인의 복리를 위하여 후견인을 변경할 필요가 있다고 인정되는 경우’이다.
Unofficial English translation
The requirement for such change is 'where it is recognized that there is a need to change the guardian for the welfare of the adult ward.'
Factors
- 선량한 관리자로서의 주의의무를 게을리하여 후견인으로서 그 임무를 수행하는 데 적당하지 않은 사유가 있는 경우로서 그 부적당한 점으로 피후견인의 복리에 영향이 있는 경우라고 봄이 상당하다
- 특별한 사정이 없는 한 성년후견인 변경사유를 판단함에 있어서는 재산관리와 신상보호의 양 업무의 측면을 모두 고려하여야 한다
- 갑이 현재 뇌출혈로 거동이나 의사표시가 어려운 상태인 사정 등을 감안하면 신상보호 임무의 관점에서 정 사단법인이 을보다 더 적합한 성년후견인에 해당한다고 단정하기 어려움에도
- 을이 수행한 재산관리와 신상보호 임무를 모두 살펴보았을 때 임무를 수행하는 데 적당하지 않아 피후견인의 복리에 저해가 된다고 볼 만한 구체적 사정이 있는지
- 기존의 성년후견인 선임을 유지한 채 다른 처분을 하는 것이 오히려 피성년후견인의 복리에 더 부합하는 것은 아닌지
Unofficial English translation
• It is reasonable to regard it as a case where there are grounds rendering the person unfit to perform the duties as a guardian by neglecting the duty of care of a good manager, and where such unfitness affects the welfare of the ward
• Unless there are special circumstances, in determining grounds for changing an adult guardian, both aspects of property management and personal protection must be taken into account
• Even though, considering circumstances such as that A is currently in a state in which movement or expression of intention is difficult due to a cerebral hemorrhage, it is difficult to conclude that the incorporated association D falls under an adult guardian more suitable than B from the perspective of the duty of personal protection
• Whether there exist specific circumstances warranting a finding that, upon examining both the property management and personal protection duties performed by B, B was unfit to perform the duties and thereby caused detriment to the welfare of the ward
• Whether maintaining the appointment of the existing adult guardian and taking another disposition might rather better accord with the welfare of the adult ward
Relation to precedent
States a new standard Read from the decision
성년후견제도의 도입 취지 및 목적, 성년후견인의 임무와 범위, 가정법원의 감독권한 등을 종합하면 성년후견인의 변경사유인 ‘피성년후견인의 복리를 위하여 후견인을 변경할 필요가 있다고 인정되는 경우’는
Unofficial English translation
Taking together the intent and purpose of the introduction of the adult guardianship system, the duties and scope of the adult guardian, the Family Court's power of supervision, etc., 'where it is recognized that there is a need to change the guardian for the welfare of the adult ward,' which is a ground for changing an adult guardian,
Decisions referred to
해당 본문 참조
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
What special circumstances would allow a guardian to be changed on an application filed right after the judgment appointing that guardian became final, given that such an application may render the earlier appointment proceedings futile?
The remand court's findings on whether the re-appellant's performance of the property-management and personal-protection duties showed concrete unfitness, and on whether keeping him with another measure would better serve the ward's welfare, would require this entry to be read again. An amendment to Article 940 of the Civil Act would also call for a fresh reading.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
5 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-25
A reader from another model family (GPT-6 Astra), given the official text but not the primary reading, agreed on 5 of the 8 axes; the readings differed on axis 4 (form of the test), axis 6 (relation to precedent), axis 8 (open question and revisit condition).
Axis 4 (Form of the test): Primary “Elements stated” vs Independent “Circumstances weighed”
The primary reading frames the two-sided review as a requirement, while the independent reading describes it as a holistic weighing; both describe the same test with different labels.
특별한 사정이 없는 한 성년후견인 변경사유를 판단함에 있어서는 재산관리와 신상보호의 양 업무의 측면을 모두 고려하여야 한다.Axis 6 (Relation to precedent): Primary “States a new standard” vs Independent “Cannot be determined”
The primary reading treats the holding as a new standard on the two-sided review, while the independent reading did not determine its precedential status.
성년후견제도의 도입 취지 및 목적, 성년후견인의 임무와 범위, 가정법원의 감독권한 등을 종합하면 성년후견인의 변경사유인 ‘피성년후견인의 복리를 위하여 후견인을 변경할 필요가 있다고 인정되는 경우’는Axis 8 (Open question and revisit condition): Primary “What special circumstances would allow a guardian to be changed on an application filed right after the judgment appointing that guardian became final, given that such an application may render the earlier appointment proceedings futile?” vs Independent “Would further examination establish concrete deficiencies warranting replacement, or would measures preserving the existing guardian better protect the ward?”
The primary reading asks what special circumstances would permit a change on an application filed right after the appointment became final, while the independent reading asks whether further examination would show concrete deficiencies or whether preserving the existing guardian would be better.
성년후견인의 변경사유인 ‘피성년후견인의 복리를 위하여 후견인을 변경할 필요가 있다고 인정되는 경우’는 가정법원이 성년후견인의 임무수행을 전체적으로 살펴보았을 때 선량한 관리자로서의 주의의무를 게을리하여 후견인으로서 그 임무를 수행하는 데 적당하지 않은 사유가 있는 경우로서 그 부적당한 점으로 피후견인의 복리에 영향이 있는 경우라고 봄이 상당하다.Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The court below, in its decision of 18 June 2020 (2019Beu10038), weighed the conflict continuing among the family over the subject person's property after his haemorrhage, the risk that continued conflict would harm his person and property, the applicant's statement that the court should appoint an objective third party, and the re-appellant's non-objection to that, and held that the guardian should be changed to the nonprofit corporation, the Korea Adult Guardianship Support Centre. The first-instance court had taken about two years to check the propriety of the guardian's work, dismissed the change application for want of sufficient showing, and ordered that the guardian obtain court permission for borrowing money and for disposing of important property such as land.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court held that the finding that continued family conflict would raise the risk of harm to the subject person's person and property was no more than vague conjecture, and that the record disclosed no concrete circumstance in the guardian's property management or personal protection making him unfit to serve. The later agreement of the applicant and the re-appellant to replace the guardian with a third party had no direct bearing on whether a ground for change existed, and given that the subject person presently cannot easily move or express his will because of the haemorrhage, it could not be concluded that the corporation was the better guardian from the viewpoint of protecting his person. Because the court below failed to examine whether the guardian's performance of both duties showed concrete unfitness, and whether keeping the guardian with another measure would better serve the welfare, it misapplied the law on changing an adult guardian and failed to hold the necessary hearing; the Court reversed the ruling and remanded the case to the Changwon District Court, on the unanimous opinion of the participating Justices.
Distinguishing conditions
- A case in which the guardian's actual property management and personal protection show concrete circumstances making performance of duty unfit and harming the ward's welfare.
- A case in which the family conflict is shown to be capable of harming the ward's welfare and changing the guardian would resolve or ease it and promote that welfare.
- A case in which a measure other than removal, such as changing the scope of the guardian's authority to represent the ward, would serve the ward's welfare.
Record verification notes
Set the file against the guardian's actual performance of both duties, since the Court looked for concrete unfitness in the work already done rather than in the conflict itself. Record when the change application was made in relation to the finality of the guardianship judgment, because a request made right after it may render the appointment proceedings futile. Ask what measure short of removing the guardian would serve the ward's welfare, and whether the applicant in fact cared for or protected the person.
From the official text
Points at issue
[1] 민법 제940조에서 성년후견인 변경요건으로 정한 ‘피성년후견인의 복리를 위하여 후견인을 변경할 필요가 있다고 인정되는 경우’의 의미 및 성년후견인 변경사유를 판단할 때 재산관리와 신상보호라는 양 업무의 측면을 모두 고려하여야 하는지 여부(원칙적 적극) [2] 갑이 뇌출혈 발병으로 거동이나 의사소통 등을 할 수 없게 되자, 갑의 큰형인 을이 성년후견개시심판을 청구하여 갑에 대한 성년후견개시 및 을을 성년후견인으로 선임하는 내용 등의 심판이 선고되어 확정되었는데, 위 심판절차에서 ‘을이 성년후견인이 되는 것에 동의한다.’는 취지의 후견동의서를 제출하였던 갑의 자녀 병이 위 심판 확정 직후 을 등이 갑의 재산을 빼앗고 후견동의서를 위조하여 제출하는 등 불법을 저질렀다고 주장하면서 성년후견인 변경청구를 한 사안에서, 성년후견인 변경사유가 있고 정 사단법인이 을보다 더 성년후견인으로 적합하다고 보아 변경심판을 한 원심판단에 성년후견인 변경에 대한 법리오해 등의 잘못이 있다고 한 사례
Unofficial English translation
[1] The meaning of 'where it is recognized that there is a need to change the guardian for the welfare of the adult ward,' which is prescribed in Article 940 of the Civil Act as a requirement for changing an adult guardian, and whether, in determining grounds for changing an adult guardian, both aspects of the two duties, namely property management and personal protection, should be taken into account (affirmative in principle) [2] A case where, after A became unable to move or communicate due to the onset of a cerebral hemorrhage, B, A's elder brother, filed a petition for an adjudication commencing adult guardianship, and an adjudication commencing adult guardianship over A and appointing B as the adult guardian, among others, was rendered and became final and conclusive; C, A's child, who had submitted in the said adjudication proceedings a written consent to guardianship to the effect that 'I consent to B becoming the adult guardian,' asserted that immediately after the said adjudication became final and conclusive, B and others committed unlawful acts such as taking away A's property and forging and submitting the written consent to guardianship, and filed a claim for change of the adult guardian; and it was held that the determination of the court below, which found that there were grounds for changing the adult guardian and that the incorporated association D was more suitable as an adult guardian than B and thus rendered an adjudication changing the adult guardian, was erroneous by reason of misapprehension of legal principles, etc. concerning the change of an adult guardian
Summary of the holding
[1] 가정법원은 직권 또는 친족 등의 청구에 의하여 성년후견인을 변경할 수 있는데(민법 제940조), 그 변경의 요건은 ‘피성년후견인의 복리를 위하여 후견인을 변경할 필요가 있다고 인정되는 경우’이다. 성년후견제도의 도입 취지 및 목적, 성년후견인의 임무와 범위, 가정법원의 감독권한 등을 종합하면 성년후견인의 변경사유인 ‘피성년후견인의 복리를 위하여 후견인을 변경할 필요가 있다고 인정되는 경우’는 가정법원이 성년후견인의 임무수행을 전체적으로 살펴보았을 때 선량한 관리자로서의 주의의무를 게을리하여 후견인으로서 그 임무를 수행하는 데 적당하지 않은 사유가 있는 경우로서 그 부적당한 점으로 피후견인의 복리에 영향이 있는 경우라고 봄이 상당하다. 또한 성년후견인의 임무에는 피성년후견인의 재산관리 임무뿐 아니라 신상보호 임무가 포함되어 있고, 신상보호 임무 역시 재산관리 임무 못지않게 피성년후견인의 복리를 위하여 중요한 의미를 가지기 때문에, 특별한 사정이 없는 한 성년후견인 변경사유를 판단함에 있어서는 재산관리와 신상보호의 양 업무의 측면을 모두 고려하여야 한다. [2] 갑이 뇌출혈 발병으로 거동이나 의사소통 등을 할 수 없게 되자, 갑의 큰형인 을이 성년후견개시심판을 청구하여 갑에 대한 성년후견개시 및 을을 성년후견인으로 선임하는 내용 등의 심판이 선고되어 확정되었는데, 위 심판절차에서 ‘을이 성년후견인이 되는 것에 동의한다.’는 취지의 후견동의서를 제출하였던 갑의 자녀 병이 위 심판 확정 직후 을 등이 갑의 재산을 빼앗고 후견동의서를 위조하여 제출하는 등 불법을 저질렀다고 주장하면서 성년후견인 변경청구를 한 사안에서, 갑이 현재 뇌출혈로 거동이나 의사표시가 어려운 상태인 사정 등을 감안하면 신상보호 임무의 관점에서 정 사단법인이 을보다 더 적합한 성년후견인에 해당한다고 단정하기 어려움에도, 을이 수행한 재산관리와 신상보호 임무를 모두 살펴보았을 때 임무를 수행하는 데 적당하지 않아 피후견인의 복리에 저해가 된다고 볼 만한 구체적 사정이 있는지, 기존의 성년후견인 선임을 유지한 채 다른 처분을 하는 것이 오히려 피성년후견인의 복리에 더 부합하는 것은 아닌지 등에 대하여 충분히 살펴보지 않은 채, 갑 명의의 재산 등을 둘러싸고 가족들 사이에 갈등이 계속되면 갑의 신상과 재산에 손해나 위험이 발생할 가능성이 높아진다는 등의 사유만을 내세워, 성년후견인 변경사유가 있고 정 사단법인이 을보다 더 성년후견인으로 적합하다고 보아 변경심판을 한 원심판단에는 성년후견인 변경에 대한 법리오해 등의 잘못이 있다고 한 사례.
Order
원심결정을 파기하고, 사건을 창원지방법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The order of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Changwon District Court.
Provisions referred to
[1] 민법 제940조 [2] 민법 제940조
Read 2026-10-25 · Cross-read 2026-10-25. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger