손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim is dismissed.
2. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) B 10,000.
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed to be combined.
1. Basic facts
A. On February 201, the Plaintiff and Defendant B continued teaching system after the Plaintiff’s mother and Defendant B’s mother, who were attending the same Section, and Defendant B’s mother and Defendant C’s mother.
B. On the other hand, on May 19, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) married with D and D on May 19, 2013; (b) returned to North Europe on June 10, 2013; (c) reported the marriage on October 15, 2013; and (d) filed a divorce lawsuit against D on October 15, 2013 with the Busan Family Court 2013Dhap2064; and (d) on January 16, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a counterclaim against D as the said court 2014Dhap157, and concluded a conciliation agreement that the Plaintiff paid 25 million won to D on March 17, 2014 by the Busan Family Court to D until April 30, 2014.
(In fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 18, 27, and 29, each of the statements, the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. The gist of the claim by the parties asserted that the Plaintiff was liable for the Plaintiff’s damages caused by the marriage between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff by referring to false facts to the effect that Defendant B had a sexual relationship with the Plaintiff even after the marriage of the Plaintiff, and that the Plaintiff was liable for compensating for the Plaintiff’s damages caused by the marriage between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B. The Defendants asserted that the Defendants were liable for compensating for the Plaintiff’s damages caused by the marriage of the Plaintiff, even though they were under the premise of marriage with the Defendant B, not only married with the Defendants following the marriage of the Defendants, but also maintained the relationship with Defendant B by concealing the fact of marriage and maintaining the relationship with the Defendant B
B. According to the reasoning of the judgment on the claim No. 1 and the result of the Defendant B’s personal examination, it is recognized that the Defendants and D around August 9, 2013, and Defendant B were sexual intercourse with the Plaintiff on or around June 2013, but they were aware that the Defendants had sexual intercourse with D around June 2013. On the other hand, it is found that the aforementioned basic facts and evidences were based on Gap’s basic facts, and evidence Nos. 1, 2, 1 through 15, 18 through 20, and 23 through 23.