Busan Address

Reference domicile Jeju

Law Firm Doz.

Busan Address

Seoul Place of Service

reference domicile Gyeong-nam

Attorney Lee Do-young

Busan Address

reference domicile Gyeong-nam

2. The plaintiff's claim for consolation money is dismissed.

3. The plaintiff shall be designated as a person with parental authority and a custodian of the principal of the case.

4. The Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff 60,000 won per month from May 1, 2016 to the date before the principal of the case reaches the age of majority as the child support of the principal of the case at the end of each month.

5. The defendant may visitation the principal of the case until the day before the principal of the case reaches his majority.

(a) A given period: 2: Saturdays every month, 11: 00 to 18:00

(b) Place: The place designated by the Plaintiff for the period before the principal of the case enters an elementary school, and the place designated by the Defendant for the subsequent years.

C. Method: The defendant takes the residence of the principal of the case and takes them back again, and the principal of the case is visitation right at any third person designated by the plaintiff until the principal of the case is admitted to an elementary school.

D. The schedule, place, and method of visitation right can be changed by subsequent consultation according to the circumstances of the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and the principal of the case, and should be respected to the maximum extent possible.

E. The plaintiff shall actively cooperate with the defendant so that the above visitation right can be achieved smoothly, and shall not interfere with this.

6. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each party.

7. Paragraph 4 can be provisionally executed.

A. Facts of recognition

(1) The Plaintiff and the Defendant were pregnant of the principal of the instant case during the teaching system, and thereafter began married life after the marriage report was completed on May 13, 2013.

(2) Since the Plaintiff and the Defendant had different living base even after marriage, they had to live as the weekend couple, and the Plaintiff did not make it easy for the Defendant to live a mutually married life due to the fact that the Defendant is to live a married couple due to the parallel fostering of the daily and the principal of the case.

(3) During that period, the Plaintiff and the Defendant have died due to the difference in nature, values, and means of living. Disputes have been repeated and deepened.

(4) In addition, according to the passage of time, the Plaintiff expressed a hostile appraisal of each other by verbal abuse against the Plaintiff, or by doing acts such as incidental or gathering of goods, etc., with severe appraisal clothes, by disregarding the Defendant.

(5) The Plaintiff and the Defendant were dismissed on August 2014, and the Plaintiff concluded a divorce with the Defendant and filed the instant lawsuit on December 9, 2014.

(6) Since the plaintiff was living separately with the defendant, the plaintiff is raising the principal of this case until now.

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence 1 to 5 (including the number of branches), Eul evidence 1 and 2, family investigation report by family investigation officers, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. Determination

(1) Determination on a divorce claim

Considering the above facts and various circumstances, including the fact that the plaintiff and the defendant did not make separate efforts for the recovery of marriage even after the lawsuit in this case, the marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant seems to have reached an irrecoverable level of failure. This constitutes grounds for divorce under Article 840 subparagraph 6 of the Civil Act, and thus, the plaintiff's claim for divorce is justified.

(2) Claim for consolation money

The facts of recognition and the marital relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant have been broken down to the extent that it is impossible to recover, and the principal cause of the failure is the difference between the plaintiff and the defendant's nature and values formed by the growth background between the defendant and the difference between the plaintiff and the defendant, lack of dialogue, method of expression, lack of understanding of the other party, lack of efforts to improve crisis situations (two persons are due to the failure of the other party's well-being, rather than endeavor to communicate and understand in their own positions, and only with the attitude of criticism against each other), etc. It seems that the plaintiff and the defendant were unable to resolve the conflict smoothly. Thus, it is difficult to hold one of the plaintiff and the defendant liable for the failure.

2. Determination as to the designation of a person with parental authority and a custodian and the claim for child support

Considering the various circumstances revealed in the arguments of this case, such as the age of the principal of this case, the situation of fostering, the intent and attitude of fostering the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and the guidelines for calculation of child support publicly announced by the Seoul Family Court, it is reasonable to designate the Plaintiff as the person with parental authority and the custodian of the principal of this case, and to determine the child support to be shared by the Defendant as set forth in Paragraph 4 of the Disposition.

3. Determination on visitation (ex officio)

Paragraph 5 of this Article.

[Ground of determination] Various circumstances shown in the argument of this case, such as gender, age, living environment, present situation, and intent of the plaintiff and the defendant of the principal of this case

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for divorce is accepted on the ground of the reason, and the claim for consolation money is dismissed on the ground of the reason, and it is decided as above with regard to the designation of a person with parental authority and a custodian, the claim for child support, and the visitation right part.