beta
(영문) 대구지방법원안동지원 2019.01.30 2018가단22497

손해배상(기)

Text

1. As to the Plaintiff A’s KRW 18,00,000, and KRW 5,000,000 to Plaintiff B, and each of the said money from October 4, 2016 to each of the said money. < Amended by Act No. 15030, Oct. 4, 2016>

Reasons

Facts of recognition

Plaintiff

A and B are married couple, and the defendant is the friendship of the plaintiff B and was known to the plaintiffs.

피고(당시 74세)는 2016. 10. 4. 09:00경 경북 봉화군 D에 있는 원고 A(당시 61세)의 집 안방에 들어가, 등 뒤에서 원고 A의 허리를 껴안고 넘어뜨린 후 그 위에 올라탄 채 몸으로 누르며 혀로 목과 귀를 핥고, 옷 위로 허벅지와 가슴을 만져 원고 A를 강제로 추행하였다

(hereinafter “instant crime.” On November 2, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for eight months for the crime of indecent act by compulsion (Tgu District Court Decision 2017No5124), and the Defendant appealed (Tgu District Court Decision 2017No5124), and the appellate court reversed the lower judgment on the ground of unfair sentencing on May 25, 2018, and sentenced the Defendant to imprisonment for eight months and a suspended sentence for two years, and the judgment became final and conclusive on June 2, 2018.

【In light of the fact that there is no dispute, each entry of Gap's 1 through 6 (including each number if there is an additional number) and the purport of the whole pleadings, the defendant is obligated to pay monetary compensation for mental damage suffered by the plaintiffs due to the tort by compulsion of the plaintiff Gap by force.

Furthermore, with respect to the amount of consolation money, the plaintiff A, who is a health team and a head of a family, was mixed with the plaintiff A's house, and the defendant invadedd the plaintiff's house and committed the crime of this case. The plaintiffs seems to have suffered a large mental impulse due to the defendant's crime of this case, which was known to him for a considerable period, and the defendant seems to have suffered a large mental impulse, even before the crime of this case was committed, and the defendant sexual harassment of the plaintiff A during a long period. Since he did not go seriously to the plaintiffs after the crime of this case, or did not make sufficient efforts to recover damage from the plaintiffs, it seems that the plaintiffs still did not go beyond the mental impulse.