Chapter 1. Purpose and Necessity of Research

  Recently the proportion of single-person households is increasing in our society and social acceptance for them is also on the rise. However, the government's policies for single-person households had mainly focused on ‘economic support.’ Against this backdrop, the Ministry of Justice formed a task force for single-person households in 2021 and prepared measures to improve the current system in such areas as civil law and criminal law over the past year. This study selects the following four topics required to make urgent legislative improvements as a result of the increase of single-person households: (i) reestablishment of family concepts under civil law; (ii) allowance of full adoption of children for single-person households; (iii) reduction of legal reserve of inheritance; and (iv) introduction of judicial deprivation of inheritance. In addition, this study comprehensively analyzes the general public's perception of the system and opinions on required improvements as well as discussions on improvements in academia and in the legal profession, thereby suggesting legislative and policy directions for systematic improvements. As for the order of this study, it first summarizes the current policies and statistical data relating to single-person households, then analyzes the survey results for improvements on the civil law system, and finally comes forward with suggestions for improvements in legislation and policies.

Chapter 2. Research Method and Current State of Research

  Section 1. Research Method

  For relevant research method, this study considers literature review of published research works (laws, prior studies and foreign cases), surveys, and statistical data analyses. First of all, through literature review, this study looks through prior studies on the histories, current state, problems, and improvement plans of the system, focusing on relevant provisions of the Civil Act and the Special Act of Civil Act relating to the research topic. In addition, it considers and analyses major cases for each topic of foreign countries, such as Germany, France, the United States, Japan, and derives implications for improvements on legislation.

  Secondly, a survey was conducted in trying to explore the general public's awareness of family composition and related legal system improvements in consideration of social changes in the number of single-person households. The content of the survey is about amendments to the Civil Act on relatives and inheritance which is the focus of this study, and is largely composed of four parts.

  The fourth part takes up the results of the survey, in which it was asked of disqualification of inheritors in terms of recognition of relevant criteria for loss of inheritance rights, violations of obligation for support, and loss of inheritance rights. It uses the results of the survey to analyze the relationship between the response rate of each question and the socio-demographic factor, verify the number of cases of each factor, and combine relevant cases into a group when such cases are inconsequential. Each question is composed of several opinions in detail, and as for the analysis results, tables are made only when there is a significant difference among groups in order to simplify complex explanations and emphasize the focus of the results.

  Thirdly, as for the statistical data analysis, the trend of changes in single-person households over the past 31 years ranging from 1990 to 2021 was analyzed based on the data of the National Statistical Office's Population and Housing Survey, in order to understand the increase and scale of single-person households. The increase in single-person households was analyzed in a couple of folds: The first part analyzes the distributions and demographic characteristics of single-person household residents by residential area of the total population (by age, gender, marital status, and education level); and the second part analyzes the distributions and demographic characteristics of single-person household owners by residential area.

  Section 2. Current state and characteristics of single-person households

  According to the National Statistical Office's Census on Population and Housing, the proportion of single-person residents in the total population aged 15 or older has increased by five times over the past 30 years since 1990. Of the total population aged 15 or older, ca. 1,021,000 single-person households accounted for 3.2% in 1990, 6.1% in 2000, 10.3% in 2010, 5.1% in 2020, and 16.3% in 2021. The proportion of single-person residents in the entire population aged 15 or older has been increasing in both the urban and rural areas over the past 30 years. By age, the proportion of single-person households living in all age groups has increasing over the past 30 years, and in particular, the proportion of single-person households living in their 20s and 30s has been rapidly increasing recently. The proportion of women of single-person household residents was higher than that of men until 2015, but the proportion of men of single-person household residents (15.2%) in 2020 was slightly higher than that of women (15.1%). The recent increase in single-person households in the male group is evident. Specifically, the proportion of single-person households in unmarried groups is rapidly increasing. The proportion of single-person households in all households accounted for 9.0% in 1990, 15.5% in 2000, 23.9% in 2010, 31.7% in 2020, and 33.4% in 2021. Since 1990, the proportion of single-person households in all households aged 15 or older has continuously increased over the past 30 years.

  Section 3. Policy Status for Single-Person Households

  The policies for single-person households that have been implemented so far may be divided into policies of the central government and those of local governments. As of 2022, there are a total of 11 local governments that enacted ordinances for support of single-person households. Seoul, Gyeonggi-do, Busan, Daegu, Daejeon, and Gwangju are those local governments that are actually pursuing policies for support of single-person households. At the central government level, the Framework Act on Healthy Families was amended in January 2018 to expand the scope of family policies under the Act. Since then, the following main policies for single-person households were implemented by the central government. First of all, in June 2020, the "mid- to long-term policy direction of single-person households" was announced jointly by relevant ministries. Further, in 2022, amendments to the Civil Act prepared by the Ministry of Justice's task force with the title of "Improvement of the legal system for social coexistence of single-person households" were submitted to the National Assembly.

Chapter 3. Major Issues of Reform of the Civil Law System

  Section 1. Re-establishment of Family Concepts under Civil Law

  The concept of family defined in the current law and the scope of family identified through the current law are the very premise for legal approval as to the kinds of personal relationship that our legal order seeks to protect as family. Like most of foreign legislation, marriage and family are not only guaranteed under the constitutional system, but also protected as fundamental rights based on human dignity and the principle of equality. As traditional family types fall under the category of protection, the subject of protection may be expanded or changed according to changes in times and society. In our society, due to individualization and diversification of life cycles, a family is no longer an immutable system, and its appearance and formation have become flexible and diverse.

  For these reasons, this study considers whether it is necessary to redefine the traditional family concept of civil law from the perspective of family diversity and make legal improvements to provide legal protection for family members living in various families. The family concept of the current civil law must be re-established. For this end, Article 779 of the Civil Act must be deleted in the first place. Firstly, the position that the legislation takes in stipulating the concept and scope of family in the Civil Act should not be valid. The conceptual definition of objects that vary according to the times and society as general provisions of the law, especially in the civil law system, should not be an appropriate legislative position, as it cannot be found in any legislative effort. Secondly, even in view of legislative history, the existence of the statutory provisions seems unreasonable since Article 779 of the Civil Act was established merely as a symbolic meaning for maintaining the current family system due to concerns over the abolition of the pre-modern Family-Head (Hoju) System. Thirdly, from the historical reasons above, Article 779 does not make sense for discipline of legal relations under the family law. Article 779 of the Civil Act does not generate any legal effect. The scope of family stipulated in the Article cannot properly regulate the current appearance of various families in our society. That is the biggest obstacle to establishing family policies and improving legislative measures. Foreign legislation tends to expand the scope of families to cope with family diversity, and the premise that makes this possible is that the scope of families should not be defined in the way that applies to the legislation as a whole.

  Section 2. Allowance of Full Adoption by Single-Person Households

  This study reviews and analyses the government's bill for the partial amendments to the Civil Act, which seeks to allow for full adoption of children for single people, and then suggest considerations for improving the current system. The adoption system consists of a couple of forms: one is the Civil Act, and the other is the Special Adoption Act. Based on the effect of adoption, it may be divided into the general adoption in which kinship with biological parents are maintained and the full adoption in which the preexisting kinship ceases to exist. The government's bill relates to the full adoption. Although the government's proposal is appropriate in general, several factors should be taken into consideration. Firstly, the systematic conformity among adoption systems should be examined. As mentioned above, if the legislation stipulates the three types of adoption, it is likely to cause systematic problems. In this case, it is not easy to secure the partial specificity of the newly established system while maintaining the systematic consistency of the entire adoption system. Secondly, the effect of changes in the parenting environment on the adoption system, such as a surge in single-person households, should be taken in to account. For this purpose, it is necessary to consider in detail whether to differentiate the parental qualification or parenting environment of general adoption from that of full adoption by single-person households.

    Section 3. Abolition of statutory legal reserve of inheritance

  The Civil Act of Korea has a statutory provision that allows an inheritee’s brother or sister to claim a portion of inheritance against the will of the inheritee. This system restricts unfettered disposition of inherited property by inheritees. In particular, to the extent that the Civil Act recognizes that even siblings are relevant right holders, it is criticized for excessively restricting the freedom to dispose of inherited property and hindering a culture for promoting donations. The legal reserve system originated from the continental-european legal system, which may be largely divided into German and French legal systems.

  It should be reasonable to exclude the legal reserve of inheritance of siblings. The scope of relatives who are willing to share economic interests seems to have been narrowed. The concept of ‘family fortune’ in the agricultural era has lost its meaning due to socioeconomic changes, which makes it difficult to think of cases where liquidation or support is required among siblings. It is also questionable whether it is particularly unethical to exclude siblings from the legal reserve. Academia take the common position that siblings should be excluded from the scope of persons entitled to a portion of legal reserve of inheritance. Comparative analysis of legal systems shows that only Taiwan makes allowance for the legal reserve of inheritance of siblings.

  Section 4. Violation of Obligation for Support and Introduction of Judicial Deprivation of inheritance

  Under the present Civil Act, only such exceptional cases (e.g., a inheritee’s killing of his or her co-inheritee or interfering with the will) are found to be acceptable grounds for disqualification from inheritance, and the failure to comply with obligation for support are not regarded as such a ground. A parent who had abandoned his or her parenting obligations may come up after the death of his or her child and then inherit the child's property several times. Because of this problem, it is necessary to introduce a legal system to exclude any parent who fails to comply with his or her support obligation from inheritance. The current legislative discussion may be largely divided into a couple of positions: one is for expansion of grounds for disqualification of inheritance, and the other is for introduction of judicial deprivation of inheritance. In academia, opinions supporting each side are conflicting with one another. The difference between the two approaches lies in whether an inheritee who has not fulfilled his or her obligation for support should be excluded from inheritance either even without an inheritor’s expression of intent (by will) or strictly following an inheritor's will. No matter which system is to be introduced, the following problems should be sufficiently considered as preliminary matters: (i) what should be relevant legal measures to protect third parties in good faith; (ii) what legal effect may occur as a result of forgiving disqualified inheritance; and (iii) what problems are raised with respect to relevant procedural statues (such as the Civil Procedure Act, the Family Procedure Act).

Chapter 4. Analysis of Survey Data on Reform of Civil Law System

  Section 1. Overview of Survey

  This study conducted survey on 3,000 samples, applying proportional distributions to regions, genders, and age groups using online survey companies. Looking at the characteristics of the respondents, Gyeonggi-do Province is the largest with 25.5% and Seoul is the second largest with 18.9%. The gender of the respondents was 52.9% for women and 47.1% for men, which is about 5.8% higher for women. In terms of age, the proportion of men in their 60s and older was the highest, and the proportion of men in their 30s was the lowest. The proportion of women was higher than that of mean only in their 60s and older, and the proportion of men in all other age groups was higher than those of women.

  There are 1,078 single-person households, accounting for 35.9% of all respondents. Looking at the socio-demographic characteristics of each household type, the proportion of men is higher than that of women in single households, and the proportion of women in households with two or more people is higher than that of men. By age, single-person household owners have a higher proportion in their 20s and 30s. while households with two or more people have a lower proportion in their 50s and 60s. There was no significant difference in educational background between single-person households and households with two or more people. The results of analysis indicate that the ‘subjectively recognized standard of living’ of single-person households was significantly lower than that of households with two or more people.

  Section 2. Family Concepts and Various Family-Related Recognitions

  Analysis of the survey data shows the general public’s thought that the family is based on blood relationship (91.6%), legally connected relationship (87.2%), and close relationships with emotional ties (87.0%), and relatively low consent was given as to whether the family is seen as an economic community (75.6%) or a living community (69.2%). In addition, 78.2% of the respondents answered that single-person households should be seen as a form of family, and more than half of the respondents said that a parent may not be called a family member if he or she does not have emotional ties as he or she is not involved in the parenting process.

  There are differences as to the definition of family and perception of family by sub-group (gender, age, educational background, marital status, household type). Women take a relatively inclusive stance on single-person households, saying that it is difficult to call a single-person household a family from the traditional perspective. Women in the 20s tend to choose and organize families, but they tend not to recognize parents without emotional ties as family members. In addition, single-person households value family options, have a strong attitude not to recognize any parent who has not fulfilled his or her parenting obligation as a family member, and agree more with the view that single-person households should be regarded as a form of family.

  The percentage of Koreans who think that spouses of de facto marriage, lovers of opposite sex, companion animals, and cohabitants of living communities are family members is higher than the percentage of those who do not think so. However, they show a more negative attitude toward thinking that spouses or lovers of the same sex are family members. It is noteworthy that the rate of considering companion animals family members was higher than that of considering cohabitants of a living community family members.

   There are differences in perceptions between various subgroups regarding de facto marriage as opposed to legal marriage, or various types of cohabiting families that are not recognized as family members under the current law. Women tend to think that companion animals or cohabitants of the same sex are family members. The younger generation tends to perceive that cohabitants of a living community, companion animals, and cohabitants of the same sex are family members. In addition, single-person household residents tend to think of cohabitants in various forms of non-legal relationships as family members who share emotional intimacy and live together.

  Many respondents agree that the right as a guardian must be recognized for a lover in a non-marital relationship for signing a surgery agreement (75.4%) or allowing delivery of the dead body in case of the death of a cohabitant (68.5%). By contrast, with respect to living communities or close relationships with people who are not legally family members, the respondents take a relatively negative attitude that they should be recognized as family members. However, it is more positive about the opinion that acquaintances and friends should be able to use family care leave like family members when single-person households need care.

  Single-person households have a much more acceptable attitude toward various family relationships in non-legal relations than 'two or more person households,' and take the position that one should recognize and protect their rights in various public and private areas as family members.

  Section 3. Allowance of Full Adoption by Single-Person Households

  First of all, the prevailing opinion is that it is more important to improve socio-cultural factors than economic support in order to revitalize adoptions. This tendency was more remarkable in women than in men. In addition, there was a more positive tendency for promoting adoption in the group of households with two or more people than in single-person households. Overall, there was a positive perception of full adoption by single persons. As for the subject of adoption, the results showed that single relatives were better than others and single-parent families were better than childcare facilities. As for adoption, there was a perception that men or men in their 50s and older emphasize more marital-centered family relations than women or persons under their 40s. Women, unmarried, divorced or separated groups are highly willing to accept new family types. One-person household groups have a more positive perception of the full adoption by single parents than two or more person households. They thought that the full adoption by a one-person household do not negatively affect traditional marital relationships. Most of the respondents are in favor of the restricted permission (allowance under strict requirements) of the full adoption by single parents. Regarding the conditions for the full adoption of single parents, there was a tendency that women than men and married than unmarried apply stricter conditions. Married, bereavement, and 'households with two or more people' groups were more positively aware of allowing the full adoption of single parents only within relatives than unmarried, divorced or separated groups. In short. this survey shows not just that most respondents were positive about adoption of children by single people, but also at the same time they thought that the conditions should be strict. This trend was more remarkable in the female group, married, and households with two or more people.

  Section 4. Abolition of Statutory Legal Reserve of Inheritance for Siblings of an Inheritee

  In terms of freedom of will and unfettered disposition of inherited property, most of the respondents answered that the right to legal reserve of spouses, children, and parents should be maintained, but in other cases, the freedom of will of a single person should prevail. The respondents in their 20s and unmarried believed that the freedom of will is more important than the right to legal reserve of inheritance, and compared to any othe group, the respondents in their 60s and more had a stronger tendency to agree that the freedom of will should be restricted by recognizing the legal reserve of Inheritance. As for the legal reserve of inheritance for siblings, most of the respondents agreed that siblings do not contribute to formation of inherited properties, having a tendency to oppose maintenance of legal reserve of inheritance for them.

  Section 5. Introduction of Deprivation of inheritance

  With respect to the introduction of judicial deprivation of inheritance on the account of an inheritor’s neglect of duty to support a inheritor (a dead person in a single-person household), there is a strong tendency to disagree to give inheritance to a parent who has violated the obligation for support. Most of the respondents answered that the intent of an inheritee should be the most important consideration. However, it may be rather unrealistic to confirm or express an inheritee’s intent before his or her death. In addition, it is generally recognized that the introduction of judicial deprivation of inheritance should cause relevant inheritees to sincerely carry out their obligations to support single persons, such as the elderly. Most of the respondents strongly agreed that the failure to provide economic support should be considered a violation of the obligation for support. However, they thought that if there exists any personal reason to provide economic support or a factor(s) to prevent provision of economic support, it should not constitute a violation of the obligation for support. The elderly, the married or the bereaved, and households with two or more people believed that only serious violations of the obligation for support should be regarded as relevant reasons for deprivation of inheritance. 

Chapter 5. Conclusion  

  This study selected the followiing four topics required to be reformed in the civil law: (i) reestablishment of family concepts under civil law; (ii) allowance of full adoption of children for single-person households; (iii) reduction of legal reserve of inheritance; and (iv) introduction of judicial deprivation of inheritance.

  Firstly, Article 779 of the Civil Act is conceptually insufficient to encompass relevant family types that do not presuppose marriage and blood ties. Rather, there is a concern that it may cause prejudice against the family types. In addition, since Article 779 of the Civil Act has resulted from a political compromise in the process of abolishing the hoju-system in the legislative history, it merely has a symbolic meaning for maintaining the existing family system.

  Secondly, to the extent that Article 908-2 Section 1 Paragraph 1 of the Civil Act allows only married couples to adopt children, it should be amended to allow for the full adoption of single parents. Since the family court examines the parenting ability, suitability as a foster parent, and a parenting situation in determining whether the adoption in question is appropriate for the welfare of children, it may not be necessary to enumerate the requirements for parents’ qualifications in detail, such as their age, economic ability.

  Thirdly, as for single-person households, there are generally no statutorily recognized legal inheritees for the first and second order of inheritance, and siblings in the third order inherit a single person’s inherited property. The proper direction for improving the inheritance system in view of changes in family diversity and structure should be to provide a statutory ground for realizing a relevant individual’s intent. It is necessary in legislation to delete the term “siblings” under Article 1112 Paragraph 4 of the Civil Act.

  Fourthly, even an inheritee who has violated his or her obligation for support is allowed under the current law to take an inherited property if he or she has blood ties with his or her inheritor. The present legislative discussions may be largely divided into the expansion of reasons for disqualification of inheritance and the introduction of judicial deprivation of inheritance. The law should be amended in the way of excluding the inheritance of inheritees who have violated their obligation for support through sufficient legislative discussions on relevant issues.