Interim Decision #2437 

MATTER OF PARK ' 

In Visa Petition Proceedings 

A-20547404 

Decided by Board October 6, 1975 

(1) Under the law of Korea, effective January 1, 1960 (Article 878, Civil Code; Article 70, 

Family Registration Law), the registration of an adoption is a prerequisite to its 

validity. 

(2) Beneficiary's adoption in Korea after January 1, 1960 which was reported to the 

Family Registrar on May 29, 1968, became valid on that date. Since beneficiary was 20 

years old at the time of the registration of her adoption, she cannot qualify as a child 

within the term of section 101(b)(1)(E) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as 

amended, and, therefore, is ineligible for preference classification under section 203-

(a)(2) of the Act, as amended, of the adopted daughter of the lawful permanent resident 

petitioner. 

ON BEHALF OP PETITIONER: Bert D. Greenberg, Esquire 

5670 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1800 

Los Angeles, California 90036 

In a decisicn dated September 26, 1974, the district director denied 

the petition to classify the beneficiary as a preference immigrant under 

section 203(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The petitioner 

has appealed from that decision. The appeal will be dismissed. 

The petitioner is an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence. 

The record indicates that the beneficiary is the adopted daughter of the 

petitioner. Tb.e beneficiary, a native of Korea, was born in March of 

1948; the adoption took place in Korea. 

The documents submitted by the petitioner indicate that the petitioner took steps to adopt the beneficiary in 1960, but that the adoption 

was not reported until May 29, 1968, at which time the beneficiary was 

20 years old. The district director denied the petition on the ground that 

the beneficiary had not been adopted while under the age of 14 as 

required by section 101(b)(1)(E) of the Act. We agree with the district 

director. 

In order to qualify as a "daughter" for preference purposes, a beneficiary must once have qualified as a "child" of the petitioner under 

section 101(b)(1) of the Act. Nazareno v. Attorney General, 512 F.2d 

936 (D.C. Cir. 1975), petition for cert. filed, 44 U.S.L.W. 3016 (No. 

472 
Interim Decision #2437 

74-1473); Matter of Coker, 14 I. & N. Dec. 521 (BIA 1974). The only 

subdivision of section 101(b)(1) relevant to this case in section 101- 

(b)(1)(E), which provides: 

The term "child" means an unmarried person under twenty-one years of age who is— 

(E) a child adopted while under the age of fourteen years if the child has thereafter 

been in the legal custody of, and has resided with, the adopting parent or parents for at 

least two years: Provided, That no natural parent of any such adopted child shall 

thereafter, by virtue of such parentage, be accorded any right, privilege, or status 

under this Act. 

The petitioner has not submitted any.evidence regarding the adoption 

laws of Korea. In connection with another case we received a memorandum of foreign law, titled Adoption Under the Civil Code of the Republic of Korea of 1960, from the Far Eastern Law Division of the Library 

of Congress. The memorandum, dated January 1971, indicates that for a 

Korean adoption taking place after January 1, 1960 to be valid, it must 

comply with certain formal and substantive requirements. Among the 

formal requisites to a valid adoption is registration with the Korean 

Family Registrar. Article 878 of the Civil Code of Korea provides: 

1. An adoption becomes effective by notification thereof in accordance with the 

provisions of the Family Registration Law. 

2. The notification mentioned in the preceding paragraph shall be made in writing 

with the joint signature of both parties and two witnesses who are of legal age. 

Article 70 of the Family Registration Law, which also became effective 

on January 1, 1960, provides: 

The notification of adoption shall be given in the domicile or residence of the adopting 

parent, or in the district in which he presently resides. 

It thus appears that registration of an adoption is a prerequisite to its 

validity under Korean law. The date of the quoted provisions of the law 

of Korea. The record indicates that the adoption was reported to the 

Family Registrar on May 29, 1968. We hold that the adoption became 

valid on that date. The beneficiary was then 20 years old, and the terms 

of section 101(b)(1)(E) have not been satisfied. 

The decision of the district director was correct. The appeal will be 

dismissed. 

ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 

473