A. The requester shall be designated as the custodian of the case.

(b)the other party shall be the claimant;

1) From May 24, 2012 to the end of each month the support fee of KRW 500,000 per month shall be paid from May 24, 201 to the end of the separation of the applicant and the other party or the marriage relationship;

2) The instant principal’s child support amounting to KRW 2,00,000 per month from May 24, 2012 to December 27, 2014 shall be paid at the end of each month.

2. The total expenses of an adjudication shall be borne individually by each person;

3. Paragraph 1-b. above may be provisionally executed.

In the first instance, the other party shall pay 462,730,000 won to the applicant for living expenses from December 1, 2009 to December 27, 2014. In the second instance, the other party shall pay 12,00,000 won per month from May 201 to December 25, 2014 (the petitioner added his primary claim in the first instance trial). In the second instance, the other party shall pay 252,358,981 won to the applicant and the principal of the case, and the other party shall pay 12,00,000 won per month from May 2012 to the time when his/her separate state of residence is resolved (the petitioner added his/her primary claim in the first instance).

2. Purport of appeal;

The trial of the first instance is amended as stated in the above preliminary claim.

The reasoning for the court's explanation on this part is the same as that for the first instance trial. Thus, Article 34 of the Family Litigation Act, Article 23 of the Non-Contentious Case Litigation Act, and Articles 443 (1) and 420 of the Civil Procedure Act are cited.

2. Determination on the claim for support allowance

A. The claimant's assertion

In the meantime, as a result of the sharing of living expenses, 1/2 of the other party’s basic income from which the amount of tax is deducted from the amount of tax imposed on the other party. From December 1, 2009 to May 31, 2011, the living expenses of 138,990,000 won and the living expenses of 323,740,000 won from June 1, 201 to December 27, 2014 when the principal of this case becomes an adult. As such, the other party is obligated to pay the claimant a total of 462,730,000 won (=138,90,0000 +323,740,000 won).

Preliminaryly, it sought payment of KRW 252,358,981 in total, including expenses for private teaching institutes, expenses for studying abroad, and living expenses of the applicant and the principal of the case, which were paid from December 2009, and sought payment of money calculated at the rate of KRW 12,00,000 per month as future support fees.

B. Determination

1) Among the non-contentious family cases under Article 2(1)2 of the Family Litigation Act, concerning the duty of support and cooperation between husband and wife and the duty of sharing living expenses, among the disposition concerning the joint living, support, cooperation, or sharing of living expenses between husband and wife under Article 2(1)1 of the same Act, the relationship between husband and wife's duty of support and cooperation between husband and wife refers to maintaining the other spouse's living at the same level as maintaining one's own living. As such, the marital life as a communal living including bringing-up of children is maintained, which leads to the sharing of living expenses, and both parties are in essence the same. In addition, when one husband and wife claims child support against the other party, the child support for the child is treated as the disposition concerning the support, cooperation, or bearing of living expenses

On the other hand, the preliminary consolidation refers to a consolidation in the form of seeking a trial against the preliminary claim in preparation for a case where the primary claim is dismissed or rejected, and the claimant, as seen above, seeks a preliminary consolidation of the claim for cost-bearing and the support allowance. This is ultimately based on the same cause of claim, but it is nothing more than a separate claim, and therefore, it cannot be viewed as a separate claim, and thus, it shall be judged as a simple claim without regard as a preliminary consolidation.

2) Determination as to the claimant's claim for support fees

A) Determination on the claim until the service date of the copy of the instant request for trial

Although the mutual support duty between husband and wife under Article 826(1) of the Civil Act naturally arises when one of the husband and wife needs to be supported by the husband and wife, in relation to the past support allowance, only a person who has received support may claim for support allowance only after the person who has received support fails to perform the support duty despite the person who has requested the support provider to perform the support duty, and the person who has received support cannot claim the payment of support allowance before receiving a claim for the performance of the support duty is consistent with the nature of the support obligation or with the concept of equity (see Supreme Court Order 2005S50, Jun. 12, 2008).

On the other hand, there is no evidence to prove that the claimant filed a claim against the other party for the performance of the obligation to support prior to the appeal of this case. Thus, the claim for the support fee until May 23, 2012, which is the date of service of the copy of the appeal of this case, is rejected.

B) Determination on the claim from the day after the duplicate of the instant written appeal is served

As the spouse of the claimant, the other party has a duty to guarantee the living of the claimant so that he can lead a community life.

Furthermore, as to the amount of support fees to be borne by the other party, the following circumstances are recognized based on the health class, the records of this case, and the overall purport of the examination, i.e., even after a lawsuit for divorce against the other party's claimant was dismissed and confirmed, the claimant and the other party still remain separate and do not make any effort to recover the marital relationship. The claimant continues to visit and stay in the United States while continuing study in the United States against the other party's will, and the applicant has completed the master course at a graduate school, and the applicant has completed three-month course at ○○ University ○○ University, a course of acquiring a kind of English teacher's qualification, and completed translation at △△ University ○ University ○○ University ○○ University ○○ University ○○ University ○○ University ○○ University ○, a course of acquiring a kind of English teacher's qualification, and the applicant's age, occupation and income, economic ability, conflict and conflict between the claimant and the other party, it is reasonable to deem that the other party is liable to pay the petitioner's support fees on the last day of May 20.

3) Judgment on the claim for child support of the principal of the case

A) Determination on the claim until the service date of the copy of the instant request for trial

The other party may bear all of the past child support before a child support is claimed to the other party. In such a case, the same standard as the child support after a request for performance is made does not need to be determined. In such a case, the extent of sharing deemed appropriate in consideration of various circumstances, such as the circumstance where one parent raises a child, the amount of expenses incurred therein, whether or not the other party has recognized the obligation to support, whether or not it is an ordinary living expense required for fostering or a large amount of expenses required for fostering, and whether or not it is a special expense (treatment cost, etc.) of the other party's property condition, economic ability and burden, etc. (see Supreme Court Order 92S21, May 13, 1994).

In light of the following: (a) the claimant unilaterally promoted the study abroad of the principal of the case and caused enormous expenses, despite the counter-party to the counter-party, by unilaterally promoting the study abroad of the principal of the case; (b) the claimant used most of the real estate and financial property in the name of the claimant and the counter-party to the joint property as the US study expenses of the principal of the case after separation; (c) the amount reaches 284,410,704 won; and (d) the other party bears all the US study expenses, etc. between the claimant and the counter-party 1, who are other children after separation; and (e) the claimant has taken care of the principal of the case, the circumstance and the degree of conflict between the claimant and the counter-party, and conflict, and the cause thereof, it is not reasonable to require the other party to bear the past childcare expenses until the delivery date of the copy of the request for the trial of this case. Thus, it is not reasonable to accept the claim for child support until May 23, 2012.

B) Determination on the claim for child support from the day after the duplicate of the instant request for judgment

The other party is obligated to bear a part of the child support for the claimant who is raising the principal of the case as his father.

Furthermore, comprehensively taking account of all the circumstances revealed in the trial process of this case, including health stand, the age, income, economic capacity, and age and parenting of the principal of this case, with respect to the amount of child support to be borne by the other party, it is reasonable that the other party pays 2,00,000 won per month from May 24, 2012 to December 27, 2014, the day following the delivery date of the duplicate of the written request for a trial of this case, as the child support of the principal of this case, to the day before the principal of this case becomes adult.

4) In this regard, the claimant asserts that the amount of the money that the other party is to pay as a result of the sharing of living expenses is the amount equivalent to 1/2 of the amount of basic income of the other party imposed upon the other party, whichever is the sum of KRW 462,730,000.

In determining the amount of support allowance, support allowance or cost-sharing, the amount of support should be determined by comprehensively considering not only the amount of both parties’ revenue, the amount of disposal that deducts public imposts, the amount of social status, etc., but also the circumstance and degree of failure in the marital life. As asserted by the claimant, the amount equivalent to 1/2 of the total amount of basic income of the claimant and the other party after deducting the amount of tax from the amount of income taxed as claimed by the claimant is not uniformly determined as the amount of support allowance or cost-sharing. Accordingly, the claimant’s above assertion is without merit.

5) Sub-committee

Therefore, the other party is obligated to pay 50,000 won per month from May 24, 2012, the day following the delivery date of a copy of the written appeal of this case as support fees to the end of each month from May 24, 2012 to the end of the other party’s separation or marriage. The other party is obligated to pay 2,00,000 won per month from May 24, 2012 to December 27, 2014, the day before the principal of this case becomes adult.

3. Conclusion

If so, it is so decided as per Disposition with regard to a change in the claimant's trial.

Justices Kim Tae-cheon (Presiding Justice)