Open Decision Ledger · Family & inheritance law
Child support reduction measured against the child's welfare
Supreme Court, Sept. 29, 2022, 2022Seu646 (ruling)
Case name: 양육비변경(감액)청구
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Where a parent applies to reduce child support fixed by an earlier agreement on the ground that the share has become excessive, is the agreed burden 'unfair' to be judged by whether it is necessary for the child's welfare, and must the court examine whether the applicant's income and property have decreased in substance enough to make a reduction necessary despite the children's growing up?
Holding
Yes. The Supreme Court held that a family court may change an agreed or adjudicated child support burden once it has become unfair, but unfairness itself is measured by whether the burden is necessary for the child's welfare. Because a reduction is generally not a measure needed for that welfare, the effect on the child comes first and the circumstances surrounding the agreement, the property settlements made on divorce, both sides' financial positions, the children and the parents' circumstances and the trend of prices are weighed together, to see whether the reduction is unavoidable and in the end necessary for the child. The Court added that the cost of raising a child normally rises as the child grows, so where excessiveness is alleged the court must examine whether the applicant's income and property have actually and substantially decreased.
Summary of the holding, verbatim
종전 양육비 부담이 ‘부당’한지 여부는 친자법을 지배하는 기본이념인 ‘자녀의 복리를 위하여 필요한지’를 기준으로 판단하여야 한다.
Unofficial English translation
Whether the previously imposed child support obligation is 'unfair' must be judged on the standard of 'whether it is necessary for the welfare of the child', which is the basic principle governing the law of parent and child.
Disposition
Reversed and remanded Stated in the decision
원심결정을 파기하고, 사건을 서울가정법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The order of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul Family Court.
Form of the test
Circumstances weighed Stated in the decision
여러 사정을 종합적으로 참작하여 양육비 감액이 불가피하고 그러한 조치가 궁극적으로 자녀의 복리에 필요한 것인지에 따라 판단하여야 한다.
Unofficial English translation
It must be determined by comprehensively taking into consideration various circumstances whether a reduction of child support is inevitable and whether such a measure is ultimately necessary for the welfare of the child.
Factors
- 종전 양육비가 정해진 경위와 액수, 줄어드는 양육비 액수
- 당초 결정된 양육비 부담 외에 혼인관계 해소에 수반하여 정해진 위자료, 재산분할 등 재산상 합의의 유무와 내용
- 쌍방 재산상태가 변경된 경우 그 변경이 당사자의 책임으로 돌릴 사정이 있는지 유무
- 자녀의 수, 연령 및 교육 정도, 부모의 직업, 건강, 소득, 자금 능력, 신분관계의 변동, 물가의 동향 등
- 자녀들의 성장에도 불구하고 양육비의 감액이 필요할 정도로 청구인의 소득과 재산이 실질적으로 감소하였는지
Unofficial English translation
• The circumstances under which the previous child support was determined, the amount thereof, and the amount by which the child support is reduced
• Whether there exists, and the contents of, any property-related agreement, such as consolation money and division of property, determined in connection with the dissolution of the marital relationship, in addition to the child support obligation originally determined
• Where the property status of both parties has changed, whether there are circumstances for which the parties may be held responsible for such change
• The number, age, and educational level of the children, the occupation, health, income, and financial capacity of the parents, changes in status relations, trends in prices, and the like
• Whether the claimant's income and property have substantially decreased to such an extent that a reduction of child support is necessary, notwithstanding the growth of the children
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 2019. 1. 31. 자 2018스566 결정(공2019상, 638)
Unofficial English translation
Supreme Court Decision 2018Seu566 decided January 31, 2019 (Gong 2019 Sang, 638)
Decisions referred to
대법원 2019. 1. 31. 자 2018스566 결정(공2019상, 638)
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
Where substantial alimony and property division were agreed on divorce, what relationship between those settlements and the child support burden is needed before the burden is said to have become unfair?
The renewed ruling of the Seoul Family Court after this remand will show how the standard is applied to a claimant's own requested pay cut and to a loan raised to buy an apartment. Any amendment to Article 837 of the Civil Act, or a change to the Seoul Family Court's child support calculation table used to compare the agreed amount with the standard support, calls for this entry to be read again.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
7 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 7 of the 8 axes; the readings differed on axis 8 (open question and revisit condition).
Axis 8 (Open question and revisit condition): Primary “Where substantial alimony and property division were agreed on divorce, what relationship between those settlements and the child support burden is needed before the burden is said to have become unfair?” vs Independent “How substantial must an actual decline in income and assets be to justify reducing support despite the children's increasing needs?”
The primary asks what relationship between alimony or property settlements and the child support burden is needed to show unfairness, while the independent asks how substantial the actual decline in income and assets must be.
종전 양육비 부담이 ‘부당’한지 여부는 친자법을 지배하는 기본이념인 ‘자녀의 복리를 위하여 필요한지’를 기준으로 판단하여야 한다.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 Seoul Family Court, in its ruling of 30 May 2022 (2021Beu30184), accepted the reduction of the child support fixed in the child support statement of 17 January 2013, made when the applicant and the respondent divorced by agreement in January 2013 with the respondent named as the carer of the twins, then aged four. It held that the amount need not be calculated from the applicant's salary alone as reduced after December 2020, but that, in view of both sides' income and property and the age of the children, the amount needed adjusting, and changed the support from KRW 1.1 million to KRW 900,000 per child.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court held that the court below had misapprehended the law on reducing child support and that the error plainly affected the trial. The applicant is an inside director of the company he works for, his pay was cut at his own request and rose again in part from February 2021, so the fall in income was neither firm enough to make a reduction necessary nor free of fault attributable to him. His debts, largely a loan of KRW 147 million raised around September 2019 to buy an apartment in Uijeongbu, were incurred to secure a home and to invest and increase assets, and could not be a reason to reduce the support owed to the children; nor did the agreed amount look unfair when set against the standard child support for the children, then aged thirteen, and the applicant's share of it under the Seoul Family Court's calculation table. It reversed the ruling and remanded the case for renewed examination.
Distinguishing conditions
- A case in which the applicant's income and property have in substance decreased so much that a reduction is unavoidable and, in the end, necessary for the child's welfare.
- A fall in income caused by a reason not attributable to the applicant and fixed in amount, rather than a cut requested by the applicant and partly restored later.
- A case where the agreed amount, set against the standard child support for the children's age and the applicant's share, does not look unfair.
Record verification notes
Before relying on this decision, trace each asserted fall in income to its cause and ask whether it was fixed and free of the applicant's responsibility, since the salary cut here was made at the applicant's own request and was partly restored later. Set every new debt against the purpose it served, since a loan raised for a home or for investment to increase assets was not treated as a reason to reduce support. Finally compare the agreed amount with the standard child support for the children's age and the applicant's share under the calculation table in force, and gather the property agreements made on divorce, since their existence and content are among the circumstances to be weighed together.
From the official text
Points at issue
재판 또는 당사자의 협의로 정해진 양육비 부담 내용이 제반 사정에 비추어 ‘부당’한지 여부는 ‘자녀의 복리를 위하여 필요한지’를 기준으로 판단하여야 하는지 여부(적극) 및 가정법원이 양육비 감액 청구를 판단할 때 고려하여야 할 사항 / 종전에 정해진 양육비의 분담이 과다하게 되었다고 주장하며 감액을 청구하는 경우, 법원은 자녀들의 성장에도 불구하고 양육비의 감액이 필요할 정도로 청구인의 소득과 재산이 실질적으로 감소하였는지 심리·판단하여야 하는지 여부(적극)
Unofficial English translation
Whether the question of whether the contents of the child support obligation determined by a court or by agreement of the parties are 'unfair' in light of all circumstances should be judged on the standard of 'whether it is necessary for the welfare of the child' (affirmative), and the matters that a family court must take into consideration when adjudicating a claim for reduction of child support / Where a party asserts that the sharing of child support previously determined has become excessive and claims a reduction thereof, whether the court must investigate and determine whether the claimant's income and property have substantially decreased to such an extent that a reduction of child support is necessary, notwithstanding the growth of the children (affirmative)
Summary of the holding
가정법원이 ‘재판 또는 당사자의 협의로 정해진 양육비 부담 내용이 제반 사정에 비추어 부당하게 되었다.’고 인정하는 때에는 그 내용을 변경할 수 있지만, 종전 양육비 부담이 ‘부당’한지 여부는 친자법을 지배하는 기본이념인 ‘자녀의 복리를 위하여 필요한지’를 기준으로 판단하여야 한다. 양육비의 감액은 일반적으로 자녀의 복리를 위하여 필요한 조치라고 보기 어려우므로, 양육비 감액이 자녀에게 미치는 영향을 우선적으로 고려하되 종전 양육비가 정해진 경위와 액수, 줄어드는 양육비 액수, 당초 결정된 양육비 부담 외에 혼인관계 해소에 수반하여 정해진 위자료, 재산분할 등 재산상 합의의 유무와 내용, 그러한 재산상 합의와 양육비 부담과의 관계, 쌍방 재산상태가 변경된 경우 그 변경이 당사자의 책임으로 돌릴 사정이 있는지 유무, 자녀의 수, 연령 및 교육 정도, 부모의 직업, 건강, 소득, 자금 능력, 신분관계의 변동, 물가의 동향 등 여러 사정을 종합적으로 참작하여 양육비 감액이 불가피하고 그러한 조치가 궁극적으로 자녀의 복리에 필요한 것인지에 따라 판단하여야 한다. 또한 통상적으로 자녀가 성장함에 따라 양육에 소요되는 비용 또한 증가한다고 봄이 타당하다. 따라서 종전에 정해진 양육비의 분담이 과다하게 되었다고 주장하며 감액을 청구하는 경우 법원은 자녀들의 성장에도 불구하고 양육비의 감액이 필요할 정도로 청구인의 소득과 재산이 실질적으로 감소하였는지 심리·판단하여야 한다.
Order
원심결정을 파기하고, 사건을 서울가정법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The order of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul Family Court.
Provisions referred to
민법 제837조
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