Exclusive Supreme Court's First-ever Decision on "Different Body"...Despite the absurd sentence, "No problem."

[Anchor]
The divorce lawsuit, which was filed by a son in his 40s with his father's body hidden in a freezer, was finalized by the Supreme Court without much doubt.

This is the first sentence against the body, and the Supreme Court says there was no procedural problem.

Reporter Shin Gwi-hye reports.

[Reporter]
Son A, who has hidden his father's body in a freezer for more than a year, continued to file a lawsuit with his stepmother pretending that his father was alive.

This is because there is a high possibility that the father would have monopolized the property if the judgment was confirmed while the parents' divorce lawsuit was underway.

The father is believed to have died last fall, and the Supreme Court confirmed the ruling in April this year.

For more than half a year, the appeals court and the Supreme Court have heard and sentenced the body.

[Mr. A's stepmother: (Last year) The second trial was probably ruled in November. And I went to the Grand Code. [How can you keep your father in the freezer for a year?]

The person has already lost his life, but the lawsuit was proceeding without any problems.

The reason is in the current law.

Divorce lawsuits are subject to self-attendance, but there is no problem even if the agent is present.

The court also does not check whether the agent is alive or not if the agent is appointed normally.

Earlier, the father's lawyer claimed that he only communicated with his son A instead of his client, but now it seems that A hid the death even from his lawyer.

[Kim Young-mi / Lawyer: If it is confirmed that he died before the (judgment was finalized), this divorce ruling is wrong. There is a reason for invalidation, so it will be a reason for retrial.]

The Supreme Court said it was embarrassing and unfortunate, but that there were no procedural problems.

We asked the Supreme Court if there were any other cases where YTN had sentenced the dead, only to receive a reply that it was difficult to pinpoint.

It seems to have effectively acknowledged that it was the first decision made over the body.

[Seo Hye-jin / Lawyer: The identity, death, and survival of the person concerned should be checked further.... I think it's a part where we have no choice but to make midnight efforts.]

Even if it is a trial that is not obligated to attend, it seems necessary to prepare a detailed supplement to verify the identity in order to restore the trust of the judiciary.

I'm YTN's Shin Gwihye.

Edit
video: Lee Ju-yeon

Design: Im Saetbyul