위약금 청구의 소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant, who were married on September 12, 1984, were divorced by the Defendant’s decision of recommending settlement on December 8, 2002 in the divorce lawsuit filed by the Defendant against the Plaintiff.
However, the Defendant maintained a de facto marital relationship with the Plaintiff on December 27, 201, and filed a lawsuit claiming consolation money and division of property (201ddan17527) with the Plaintiff at this court on December 27, 201, and the Defendant also filed a counterclaim against the Plaintiff to the claim for consolation money and division of property (201ddan10124) and rendered a judgment on October 22, 2013 that “A shall pay KRW 282 million to B as division of property” (hereinafter “property division judgment”), and the said judgment became final and conclusive on November 19, 2013.
B. On November 28, 2013, the Defendant rendered a judgment on division of property as the executive title, and filed an application for compulsory sale of real estate D and E with respect to the real estate owned by the Plaintiff on November 29, 2013. (2) On December 9, 2013, the Defendant sent the following content-certified mail (Evidence 7-1) to the Plaintiff on December 9, 2013, and prepared and attached a separate written agreement regarding division of property after the judgment on division of property became final and conclusive.
After reviewing the details of the draft written agreement on the adjustment of division of property by sending it, it shall be determined by December 13, 2013, and the answer shall be drawn up.
If the decision is not made or the answer is not made, B is bound to proceed with the future disputes as it is in accordance with the law and principles.
In other words, the final and conclusive judgment has become final and conclusive because the court did not file an appeal with respect to the adjudication of divorce including both parties' claim for division of property within the statutory deadline, and the above agreement becomes aware that there is an auxiliary effect only to the extent that it does not infringe on the res judicata.
Nevertheless, such an agreement is written.