Visitation:
spouses may part, but time between parent and child remains

It is also the child's right

Article 837-2(1) of the Civil Act grants the right of visitation both to the parent who does not raise the child and to the child. The Supreme Court cited as the purpose of this system that, even after the parents separate, the child must not lose closeness with both of them in order to be emotionally stable and grow up with a healthy personality, and therefore held that it is both the parent's right and the child's right (Supreme Court Order 2017Seu628, dated December 16, 2021).

It is therefore hard to justify the custodial parent refusing to let the child be seen out of resentment toward the former spouse. The same goes for cutting off visits because child support has not been paid. Money and visits are not tied together as conditions to be traded for each other.

How to set a schedule and make sure it is kept

1. Specific enough to put on a calendarSet which weeks and days, from what time to what time, whether there are overnight stays, how school holidays and national holidays are divided, where the child is handed over, and even the times for video calls. Vague promises are hard to enforce in court later.
2. Confirm it in an agreement, mediation or judgmentIn a divorce by agreement, write it into the child care agreement; during a lawsuit, include it in the mediation or judgment. You can also petition for a ruling separately after the divorce; this is a Class E non-contentious family case, so mediation comes first (Article 50 of the Family Litigation Act).
3. Order for implementationIf the other parent refuses without reason to let you see the child, apply to the family court for an order to perform (Article 64(1)3 of the Family Litigation Act).
4. Fines and what comes nextIf even the order for implementation is not followed, seek imposition of a fine (up to KRW 10 million) (Article 67(1)). Article 68, which provides for detention, does not include the duty to allow visitation, so if the refusal continues, you may need to consider a claim to change the visitation arrangements or even to change the custodial parent.

As the child's age and life change, the arrangements can be revisited. It is common to start with a few daytime hours when the child is young and expand to overnight stays as the child grows; conversely, if problems for the child arise during visits, you can ask for a reduction (Article 837-2(3) of the Civil Act). A modification case is also a Class E non-contentious family case, so mediation comes first.

If you cannot see your child because the lawsuit is not over, seek interim visitation, applicable until the judgment, by a pre-trial disposition (Article 62 of the Family Litigation Act). The longer the time without contact, the harder it is to restore the relationship.

Claims by grandparents

A 2016 amendment to the Civil Act made it possible for grandparents to petition to see their grandchildren. The requirement is that the non-custodial parent cannot see the child for unavoidable reasons, such as having died, being seriously ill or living abroad. In that case, that parent's lineal ascendants, that is, the grandparents and others, file a claim with the court, and the court considers the child's wishes, the relationship between the claimant and the child, the motive for the claim and so on (Article 837-2(2)). It is mainly used by people who lost their own child and then, having lost contact with the son-in-law's or daughter-in-law's side, can no longer see their grandchildren.

Unlike a claim by a parent, in a grandparent case the court first examines, one by one, whether the statutory requirements are met. You must show, with concrete circumstances, the relationship built with the grandchild and why visits are needed now. The rule that the court must in principle hear the views of a child aged 13 or older when it decides on its own motion applies equally (Article 18-2 of the Rules on Family Litigation).

When visitation is restricted

If visits appear to harm the child, the court, on application or on its own initiative, reduces the frequency, suspends them or changes the method (Article 837-2(3)). But the Supreme Court's basic position favors allowing visitation. It said that even if negative factors appear for now, the court should first look for a solution by adjusting time, place and method, and should be cautious about eliminating visitation altogether based only on vague concerns (Order 2017Seu628).

Recently, the Supreme Court reversed a lower court decision that had rejected a visitation application solely because the child's whereabouts were unclear, making it hard to set specific dates. It also made clear that where a claim to designate the person with parental authority and the custodial parent, or a child support claim, is pending in the divorce trial, the other party may also request visitation by way of a counterclaim (Supreme Court Decision 2024Meu15467, decided July 16, 2026).

Frequently Asked Questions

Related DAEON Case Results

Related Guides

Written on the basis of Korean statutes in force (National Law Information Center, Ministry of Government Legislation) and court precedents as of October 20, 2026. Results may differ with amendments to the law or the facts of each case. This page is general information, not legal advice.

Written and reviewed by Attorney Dongwoo Shin — Ph.D. in Law; certified criminal law specialist and certified divorce law specialist registered with the Korean Bar Association. He handles each case personally from consultation to judgment. About the attorney →
Last updated October 20, 2026