Staying Abroad Continually for 2 Years Excludes Birth Tourism, But Court Rules Presence Must Be ‘Continuous’ Including Birth Date,
ⓒ News1,
,
, “(Seoul=News1) Reporter Hong Yujin = Even if one has stayed abroad for more than 2 years around the time of giving birth, if they have not been continuously present during that time, it may be considered ‘birth tourism’ to acquire foreign nationality, according to a court ruling.”,
,
, ‘On the 24th, legal circles stated that the Seoul Administrative Court’s Administrative Division 1 (Chief Judge Yang Sang-yun) ruled against plaintiff A (22) in an administrative lawsuit against the head of the Seoul Southern Immigration Office to overturn the rejection of nationality selection notification.’,
,
, “A, whose parents are both Korean, was born in the U.S. in July 2003 and acquired dual nationality of Korea and the U.S. In February last year, when A turned 21, they pledged not to exercise foreign nationality and filed a nationality selection notification in Korea.”,
,
, “The ‘pledge not to exercise foreign nationality’ allows dual nationals to keep their Korean citizenship without renouncing foreign citizenship. Submitting a written pledge to the Ministry of Justice not to exercise foreign nationality in matters like military service, taxes, criminal punishment, or foreign school admission allows one to retain dual nationality.”,
,
, “But the Immigration Office rejected A’s nationality selection notification, viewing A’s birth as ‘birth tourism’ aimed at acquiring dual nationality despite A’s mother’s established life base in Korea.”,
,
, ‘In response, A filed an administrative lawsuit claiming that their mother did not give birth in the U.S. for the purpose of acquiring dual nationality.’,
,
, ‘A claimed that since their parents stayed in the U.S. for over 2 years before and after the birth, it qualifies for the exception in Article 17, Clause 3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Nationality Act, which excludes birth tourism if parents stayed abroad for study or work reasons for more than 2 years.’,
,
, ‘A’s mother departed for the U.S. on July 7, 2003, gave birth to A on July 30, and returned to Korea on August 20, 2003. She lived in Korea afterward until traveling back to the U.S. from 2011 to 2015 for about 4 years.’,
,
,
ⓒ News1 Kim Ji-young,
,
, “Nonetheless, the court sided with the Immigration Office. The court determined that unless parents stayed abroad ‘continuously’ for 2 years including the birth date, one cannot arbitrarily combine stay periods before and after birth.”,
,
, ‘The court also noted, “A’s mother returned to Korea after the birth and only went back to the U.S. in 2011,” and it is reasonable to view her travel as aimed at obtaining foreign nationality for her child while her life was based in Korea.’,
,
, ‘The court stated, “Simply because the period before and after birth is more than 2 years doesn’t mean it qualifies for the exception clause,” emphasizing that such interpretation would undermine the legislative purpose of preventing schemes like birth tourism.’,
,
, ‘The court concluded, “Under the nationality law of our country, strict single nationality principle was upheld until limited dual nationality was permitted through the 2010 law amendment,” and noted that the “pledge not to exercise foreign nationality” is not an automatic right claimable by individuals.\n’