beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.11.10 2020가단5102283

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The defendant's KRW 15,00,000 and its amount shall be 5% per annum from June 18, 2020 to November 10, 2020 to the plaintiff.

Reasons

Facts of recognition

The plaintiff(1974) has two minor children (207, 2010, 2010, 2010, 2010) as the legal couple who completed the marriage report with C(1975, 1975) on July 29, 2002.

The defendant completed the marriage report with D on December 29, 2006 and has two minor children under the chain.

Around June 2018, the Defendant, at the Dong Chang-gu group of Chang-gu, Dong Chang-dong around the end of June 2018, even with knowledge that C is a spouse, continued to maintain two mets, and continuously exchangeds through mobile phones, etc., and maintained an inappropriate relationship for at least one year until December 2019.

On February 3, 2020, D, the Defendant’s spouse (C) confirmed the inappropriate relationship with the Defendant and C, and filed a lawsuit against C claiming consolation money due to a tort (unlawful act) and rendered a judgment on May 1, 2020 that “C shall pay damages of KRW 15,000,000 to D” (Seoul Western District Court 2020Gadan212500). The judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

After D filed a lawsuit against C, the Plaintiff confirmed the relationship with the Defendant through C, and filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant on April 10, 2020.

[Grounds for recognition] A. 1 to 5, each entry into the evidence No. 1, and each entry into the evidence No. 1, and the purport of the entire arguments, and a third party who established the liability for damages shall not interfere with a married couple’s communal living falling under the essence of marriage, such as intervention in a married couple’s communal life, thereby causing the failure of a married couple’s communal life.

In principle, a third party's act of infringing on or interfering with a marital life falling under the essence of marriage by committing an unlawful act with either side of the married couple and causing mental pain to the spouse by infringing on the rights of the spouse as the spouse.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997 Decided November 20, 2014, etc.). The Defendant is the Defendant.