Busan

Attorney Lee Do-young

Busan

2. KimD ( - 3)

The case principal's address and reference domicile are the same as the plaintiff

2. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 7,00,00 won as consolation money, and 5% per annum from December 17, 2014 to June 19, 2015, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

3. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 10, 500, 000 won with 5% interest per annum from the day following the day when the judgment became final and conclusive to the day of full payment.

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

5. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 400,00 per month from June 10, 2015 to February 4, 2017 as the child support of the instant principal, and KRW 200,00 per month from the following day to May 20, 202.

6. The plaintiff's remaining claim for consolation money is dismissed.

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

8. Paragraphs 2 and 5 can be provisionally executed.

A. Facts of recognition

1) The Plaintiff and the Defendant are legally married couple who reported marriage on February 27, 1996, and the principal of the case was born between two persons.

2) From around 2007 to 2013, the Defendant stated to the effect that the Plaintiff and his branch engage in any unlawful act or sexual traffic without any reasonable ground with another high-priced male and female, or conducted sexual traffic.

3) The Defendant was treated from April 17, 2007 to October 27, 2009 as well as from October 27, 2013 * A hospital due to a bipolartic disorder and a man-psying symptoms with mental disorder.

4) On August 15, 2013, the Defendant: (a) 74 or telephone called by the Plaintiff who did not receive a mobile phone.

5) On August 20, 2013, the Defendant reported to 112 that the Plaintiff is engaging in sexual traffic, but was treated as a misunderstanding report.

6) The Plaintiff currently raises the instant principal.

[Grounds for Recognition] Each entry in Gap evidence 1 to 8 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleading

B. Determination

According to the above facts, the marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant is due to the defendant's symptoms, etc., which constitutes grounds for divorce under Article 840 subparagraph 6 of the Civil Code, and thus, the plaintiff's claim for divorce is justified.

Furthermore, since the marriage relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant has reached a failure due to the above reasons attributable to the defendant, and it is apparent that the plaintiff has suffered mental loss, the defendant is obligated to pay consolation money to the plaintiff. Considering the marriage period of the plaintiff and the defendant, the circumstances leading up to the failure of the marriage, the degree of the failure of the marriage liability, the degree of intent to cause the failure and the ability to pay consolation money, etc., the amount of consolation money shall

It is reasonable.

Therefore, the Plaintiff and the Defendant are divorced, and the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at 20% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion of Legal Proceedings, etc. from the following day of December 17, 2014, which is the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case to the Defendant, as sought by the Plaintiff, to the Plaintiff. The Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act until June 9, 2015, which is the day of this decision, which is the date of this decision, which is appropriate to dispute about the scope of the Defendant’s obligation to perform.

2. Determination as to the claim for division of property

A. Facts of recognition

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Evidence Nos. 9-1, 2, and 10, the plaintiff and the defendant leased the leased house of KRW 13,00,00 with the care of the defendant parent around 1996 and started a new living. The defendant worked in the Chinese house located in Ulsan for the period from 1998 to 1998 and worked in a bath around 2001. The plaintiff received compensation of KRW 20,000,000 due to the death of his father's industrial accident around September 2001. The plaintiff acquired the qualification as caregiver around September 200, the plaintiff and the defendant leased the house of KRW 13,00 with the care of the defendant parent around September 200 to July 201.* The plaintiff and the defendant occupied the building under the name of the defendant* * part of the building* 200,000, * the above fact that he occupied the building under the name of the defendant** 2, 2007.

B. Determination

In light of the above facts, the Plaintiff appears to have been in charge of fostering the principal of this case and his family affairs, and as seen below, the Plaintiff’s bringing up the principal of this case in the future in the future, the actual period of marital relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s contribution to the formation and maintenance of property subject to division of property, the developments leading up to the marriage life and marriage failure between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and the age, health conditions, economic ability, etc., it is reasonable to determine the division of property between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s co-property, which are subject to division of property, only 21,00,000,000, as lease deposit claims, and the division of property between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and 50%, respectively.

In full view of the circumstances revealed in the instant pleadings, such as the type of property subject to division, the status of use, the current name and the process of acquisition, and the Plaintiff’s intention, etc., the above lease deposit claims shall vest in the Defendant according to the current name. However, it is appropriate to divide the amount of property ultimately to be reverted to the Plaintiff according to the division ratio of property into the method that the Defendant pays to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 10, 500,000 won ( = 21,00,000 won x 0.5) and damages for delay calculated with 5% per annum under the Civil Act from the day following the day when the decision is finalized to the day of full payment.

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

Considering the fact that the Plaintiff currently raises the principal of the case, the developments leading up to the marriage and failure of the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the age and parenting of the principal of the case, the intent of the Plaintiff’s custody, the Defendant’s health status, and the income and property status of the Plaintiff and the Defendant, etc., the Plaintiff is designated as the person in parental authority and the custodian of the principal of the case for the smooth growth and welfare of the principal of the case. From June 10, 2015 to February 4, 2017, which is the day following the date of the decision of this case that the Plaintiff seeks to pay the Plaintiff the child support of the principal of the case, the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff KRW 400,000 each month from June 10 to February 4, 2017, which is the day before the date of the decision of this case’s decision that the Plaintiff would become an adult, and it is reasonable to pay the Plaintiff KRW 20 until May 20, 200 each month.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for divorce is accepted on the grounds of the above recognition, and only part of the claim is accepted on the grounds of the above recognition, and it is so decided as per Disposition with respect to division of property, designation of a person with parental authority and a person with custody, and child support.