손해배상(기)
1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 35,00,000 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its related amount from March 13, 2018 to March 29, 2019. < Amended by Act No. 15054, Mar. 13, 2018>
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
Basic Facts
On May 18, 1993, the Plaintiff and the Defendant were legal couples who completed the marriage report, and the agreement was married on September 11, 2001.
During the period of marriage with the plaintiff, the defendant delivered C with C or Cheating and delivered C with C on August 22, 1997.
At the time, the defendant did not notify the plaintiff of the fact that D was the married child, and reported the birth as D was the child of the plaintiff.
At the time of the divorce between the plaintiff and the defendant, they were the sole child at the time of the divorce between the plaintiff and the defendant, who was four years of age, designated the person in parental authority and the custodian as the defendant, and the defendant later reard D.
On May 209, the Plaintiff filed a claim for the Suwon District Court 2009Ja217 with the Suwon District Court for the visitation right trial on D, but the Defendant stated in the relevant case that “D may be confused if the Plaintiff was in a situation where D had not yet been satisfed for a long time, and D would actively cooperate with D after five years from the Plaintiff’s completion of the college entrance right examination.”
On May 18, 2010, the above court dismissed the plaintiff's claim for visitation right based on the fact that "the plaintiff showed violent tendency, such as inflicting injury on the defendant during the marriage period, and that the relation with D was very important due to the prolonged exchange force, etc., the visitation right in the present situation shall infringe the welfare of D," and the above judgment became final and conclusive thereafter.
Then, on August 30, 2017, the Defendant filed a suit against the Plaintiff and D seeking confirmation of existence of paternity with the Seoul Family Court Decision 2017Ra329576, and asserted that “the Plaintiff and D shall not have parental relation.”
The above court entrusted the examination of blood and genes to Seoul National University Hospital, which led to the result that "the plaintiff and D shall not be deemed to have a genetic relationship."
[Ground of recognition] There is no dispute.