2014divone 14302 (Counterclaims) Divorce, etc.

Busan Address

Busan District Court

Attorney Lee Do-young

The domicile and original domicile of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) are as the same.

Law Firm Doz.

The domicile and original domicile of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) are as the same.

2. All claims for consolation money against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) are dismissed.

3. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) pays to the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff) 30,000 won as division of property and 160,000 won with 5% interest per annum from the day following the day this decision is confirmed to the day of complete payment.

4. The plaintiff (a counterclaim defendant) shall be designated as a person with parental authority and a person with custody of the principal of the case.

5. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) pays to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) KRW 7 million for the past rearing expenses of the instant principal and KRW 400,000 per month from January 1, 2016 to February 25, 2017; and KRW 500,000 per month from the next day to February 25, 2023 to the end of each month.

6. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) may hold an interview with the principal of the case as follows until the day before the principal of the case reaches his majority.

(a) schedule;

1) Second, fourth Saturday 12:00 to 19:00 the following day (including accommodation).

2) For the summer and winter vacation period after entering an elementary school: Seven days each determined by mutual agreement.

3) Year’s New Year’s Day and Year’s Year’s Year’s Year’s Year’s Day: Each one day determined by mutual agreement.

(b) Place: A place designated by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff);

(c) Method: The method by which the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff) takes part after completing the visitation right after going to the residence of the principal of the case;

D. The schedule set forth in the above paragraph A (a) must be changed by subsequent consultation following the growth of the principal of the case, and should be respected to the maximum extent possible.

E. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) shall actively cooperate with the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) so that the above visitation right can only be achieved, and shall not interfere with this.

7. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each party, including a principal lawsuit and a counterclaim.

8. Paragraphs 5 and 6 can be provisionally executed.

The disposition Nos. 1, 4, and the defendant (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") shall pay to the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant; hereinafter referred to as the " plaintiff") 20% interest per annum from the day following the delivery of a copy of the main claim of this case to the day of complete payment. The amount calculated at the rate of 3, 4150,00 won per annum from the day following the day of the final judgment of this case to the day of full payment. The defendant shall pay 8.4 million won with the rearing expenses of the principal of this case to the day of full payment. The amount of KRW 5.5% interest per annum from the day after the day of final judgment of this case to the day of full payment. The amount of KRW 8.4 million with the rearing expenses of the principal of this case shall be paid from December 1, 2015 to February 25, 2017 to the last day of each month.

Counterclaim Claim

The plaintiff shall pay 30 million won as consolation money to the defendant and 5% per annum from the day following the service of a copy of the counterclaim of this case to the day of this judgment, and 15% per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment, as division of property, the defendant shall receive 150,510,025 won per annum from the plaintiff, and at the same time he shall complete the registration procedure for transfer of ownership for the reason of division of property from the plaintiff to the plaintiff, and at the same time he shall receive 150,510,025 won per annum from the plaintiff, and at the same time he shall complete the registration of transfer of ownership of the above real estate from the defendant to the Busan District Court branch branch of the Busan District Court * * * * * * * 150,510,00 won per annum 25,05 won per annum.

1. Determination on the claim for divorce and consolation money against each principal lawsuit and counterclaim

A. Facts of recognition

1) The plaintiff and the defendant are legally married on May 2, 2000 and have the principal of the case between the plaintiff and the defendant.

2) The plaintiff worked as the assistant nurse before the marriage, but after the marriage, he was the professional assistant nurse and beauty artist at the time of the marriage. The defendant married at the time of graduation on February 2, 2000, and was married to Busan at the same time, but was living at the workplace from April 2002 to around March 2002, the plaintiff was dismissed from office as the head of Silsan around April 2003, and the director was dismissed from office as the head of Silsan around February 2004.

3) The Plaintiff and the Defendant resided in China after the Defendant was issued as a resident of China around August 2007, and around June 2010, and * * Si* Si * living in an apartment complex located in a new city.

4) On January 2013, when the Plaintiff was dissatisfied with the Defendant’s frequent severance from office and the director, the Plaintiff found the Kakao Stockholm message that the Defendant sent to KimD, such as “Sakao Kao Kao Kao Kao Kao.” In addition, the Plaintiff became aware of the fact that the Defendant provided several contacts with KimD during the period from February 20, 2013 to March 25, 2013.

5) Accordingly, the Defendant: (a) intended to exchange KimD with the Plaintiff by singing in a singing channel; and (b) proposed family travel to the meaning of reconciliation; and (c) operated family travel around that time.

6) On June 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant arranged the life during the period, and newly constructed two-story detached houses (the residential purpose) on the ground of the real estate listed in the attached Table 1 of the real estate purchased by the Plaintiff and the Defendant before the Plaintiff and the Defendant in mind of operating a camera by settling in the Plaintiff’s friendship, while purchasing the real estate listed in the attached Table 2 of the real estate on July 31, 2013 and newly constructing the first floor detached houses (the car page) on the ground.

7) The Plaintiff and the Defendant resided in the above second floor detached house and opened a car page in the above second floor detached house. However, the Plaintiff and the Defendant had difficulty in making up for the import of the car page operating expenses and living expenses because they were required to customers only at the end of the week.

8) Meanwhile, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to use a new car upon settlement in Busan, taking into account the condition of traffic inconvenience. However, the Defendant decided to use the car at the beauty room after the Plaintiff was landed to Busan, but the Defendant strongly rejected the Plaintiff’s request for the purchase of the car at the time of the Plaintiff’s request for the purchase of the car. On the other hand, the Plaintiff’s direct payment and living expenses were to be imposed on the Plaintiff. On the other hand, the Plaintiff left the car page to the Defendant and started to work at the beauty room.

9) After the Plaintiff and the Defendant settled in Busan, there were differences in opinions on the operation of the carpet, which is a hostile state, and on the purchase of the tea, and the subsequent dispute occurred frequently on the grounds of the Plaintiff’s severance from employment and late return home, etc.

10) On May 11, 2014, the Plaintiff requested a divorce to the Defendant after having been employed in the beauty room and the camping room. On May 21, 2014, the Plaintiff demanded a divorce as a result of the re-contentious of the above issues, and the Defendant strongly opposed to the Defendant and went through physical fighting. On June 2, 2014, the Plaintiff had the principal of the instant case and lived in the family-friendly relationship, and around August 2014, the Defendant also left the principal of the instant case to the Plaintiff’s mother and left the principal of the case to the local area, and all the household tools, which were in the house, have been separated until now.

[Ground of recognition] The entire or part of the statement, Gap 1 through 11, 14 through 18, 30, 32, 33, 41, 43, and Eul 1's statement, Gap 31, Eul 1 through 5, and Eul 20, the family fact-finding report on the preparation of the family fact-finding investigator, the whole purport of arguments, and the whole purport of arguments.

B. Determination on the principal lawsuit and each counterclaim

1) Claim for each principal lawsuit and counterclaim

For the reasons under Article 840 subparagraph 6 of the Civil Act, each quotation

2) Claim for consolation money for each principal lawsuit and counterclaim

Each Dismissal

3) Grounds for determination

A) Of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the part concerning the reason under Article 840 subparag. 1 and 3 of the Civil Act

The plaintiff asserts that the marital relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant has reached a failure due to the defendant's wrongful act, the defendant's violence, and the unfair treatment against the plaintiff between the defendant and the defendant.

On February 2, 2013, the defendant committed an act of contact with KimD and committed a fraudulent act. However, the defendant's death with respect to this part of this part of this part of this part of this part of this case, and the fact that the plaintiff was living together with the director of Busan after the death of the plaintiff, which led to a separate living. Thus, it is reasonable to deem that the plaintiff provided a letter of favor. The evidence submitted by the plaintiff alone is insufficient to deem that the defendant's improper act and the reason for the plaintiff's assertion was the main reason for the failure of the marital relationship of this case. Thus, the plaintiff's claim for divorce on this ground is without merit.

B) Of the Defendant’s assertion, the part concerning the grounds under Articles 840 subparag. 2, 3, and 4 of the Civil Act

The defendant asserts that the marital relationship of this case has reached a failure due to extremely unfair treatment against the defendant and the father and mother of the defendant, such as without fault to the plaintiff's family, etc.

On the other hand, the evidence presented by the defendant alone is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff is mainly responsible for the failure of the marital relationship of this case as alleged by the defendant. Thus, the defendant's claim for divorce based on this is without merit.

C) The part concerning the reason under Article 840 subparagraph 6 of the Civil Code among the plaintiff's assertion

In light of the various circumstances revealed in the pleading, it is reasonable to deem that the marital relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant has disappearedd, in light of the following: (a) the plaintiff and the defendant agreed on the divorce through the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim in this case; (b) the plaintiff and the defendant committed the other party to the lawsuit; and (c) the plaintiff and the defendant did not make any effort to recover the marital relationship separately from June 2, 2014; and (d) the plaintiff and the defendant have aggravated their marital relationship to the extent that the plaintiff and the defendant are unable to recover and are unlikely to continue their marital life; and (e) there is no possibility to recover each other’s trust and continue their marital relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant. Accordingly, all of the claims for divorce between the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim in this case are justified.

D) The Plaintiff and the Defendant’s liability with respect to failure are equal.

In light of the period of marriage and the circumstances leading up to the failure of the defendant's marriage, the plaintiff and the defendant's claims for consolation money and counterclaim are not accepted. The plaintiff and the defendant's claims for consolation money are all accepted.

2. Determination as to the claim for division of property

A. Facts of recognition

1) The Plaintiff and the Defendant received from the Defendant’s parents KRW 30 million, and prepared Busan * * the new marriage house in which the Defendant’s parents were located. On January 1, 2002, the Plaintiff and the Defendant got 70 million Won with assistance from the Defendant’s parents.

2) The plaintiff and the defendant purchased apartment units at KRW 120 million with the director of the plaintiff and the defendant. The above purchase price was acquired from the above apartment cover debt (the amount equivalent to KRW 15.6 million) and was appropriated as part of the money (the amount of KRW 770 million) and the deposit money for the safe house (the amount of KRW 70 million) and the deposit money for the safe house. On April 6, 2004, the plaintiff and the defendant acquired from the defendant's parent and used the above purchase amount of KRW 10 million.

3) The Plaintiff and the Defendant returned from China around May 2010 and prepared a set of set of set of set of set of set of set of set of set of set of set of set of set of set of set of set of deposit money with KRW 120 million in New Cities. On May 19, 2010, the Plaintiff and the Defendant used the set of set of KRW 30 million from Defendant’s parents. The Plaintiff and the Defendant set up a set of set of set of set of set of set of set of set of KRW 120 million to Defendant’s female students.

4) After selling 170,000,000 won of apartment in Suwon, the Plaintiff and the Defendant purchased real estate listed in the attached Table 1 on October 24, 201 and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the Plaintiff’s future on October 24, 201. Of the remaining sales proceeds, the Plaintiff and the Defendant paid the upper portion (120,000,000 won from 120,000,000 won to 160,000 won of the new town apartment in question).

5) On December 2, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendant newly constructed a second floor house on the real estate listed in the attached Table 1, and appropriated the amount of KRW 20 million loaned by the Defendant’s accompanying company, KRW 20 million from the Maspbook, KRW 20 million from the Maspbook, and KRW 20 million from the Defendant’s parents on September 28, 2012.

6) On July 31, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant purchased real estate listed in the attached Table 2 on KRW 11,500,000,000,000 and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the Defendant’s future. On that ground, the Plaintiff and the Defendant newly accumulated a single-story house on that ground. During that period, the expenses incurred by the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the Defendant collected from the Defendant’s parent, and the amount of KRW 10,00,000,000, and the said real estate loaned to the Defendant’s parent as collateral, and KRW 45,00,000,000,000.

7) The Plaintiff and the Defendant newly constructed a building on the ground specified in the attached Table 1 and 2 of the real estate list as above, and received the Plaintiff’s erroneous assistance, and the Plaintiff also prepared meals for the building sites, or arranged for the meals of the building department, and visited the competent Gu office to obtain building authorization and permission.

(b) Property and value to be divided;

The details of the property in the attached Form shall be as shown in the list.

[Reasons for Recognition] The entire or any part of the statements, the evidence stated in the above facts of Recognition, Gap19, 35, 36, 37, 48, Eul6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 14, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

C. The party's assertion and judgment on the property subject to subdivision

1) As to the Plaintiff’s assertion

A) On June 5, 2014, the Plaintiff claimed that real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 as shown in the separate sheet No. 1 as collateral and unpaid family expenses of KRW 9.4 million due to loaning KRW 5 million to the Defendant, 9.4 million due to real estate construction expenses listed in the separate sheet No. 1 and No. 2, the Plaintiff paid KRW 12 million to the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff, and KRW 5 million due to loan borrowing of KRW 1,2 million to the Plaintiff and KRW 5 million due to the Plaintiff’s remaining money for all expenses of education, public charges, etc. of the principal of the case, and this part should be reflected as a joint debt of the husband and wife, as a negative property subject to division.

In light of the fact that the Plaintiff received a high amount of loans up to KRW 50,000,00 as collateral for real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 after the Plaintiff was married, and the family overseas travel claimed by the Plaintiff was about around August 2010, and there was no discussion among the Plaintiff and the Defendant in advance regarding the construction cost that the Plaintiff paid to she was off and off, each of the statements or videos stated in the evidence No. 12,20, 21, 24 through 27, 34 through 38 submitted by the Plaintiff is sufficient to recognize that the above loan granted by the Plaintiff after the date of the marriage dissolution was consumed for the legitimate use related to the marital community life, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise, this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit (Provided, That the Defendant has to determine the rate of property division separately from the circumstances of the Defendant’s child support, even if the Plaintiff was the principal of the case from around August 2014 to the present date).

B) The Plaintiff asserts that since the Defendant purchased a 2012-gu 2012-gu 2013-gu 2012-gu 10, and sold it without delay to the Plaintiff after the Plaintiff left the 201-gu 2013-207, the Plaintiff used the mar-gu 201-7 200-7 100

The facts that the Defendant sold A-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wed-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing-Wing,

2) As to the Defendant’s assertion

The defendant asserts that since the defendant borrowed KRW 3,00,000,000 from the defendant's parents around the time of the purchase of the new house from the river, KRW 1,100,000,000,000,000 from April 6, 2004, which was around the time of the purchase, and KRW 1,000,000,000,000,000 from May 19, 2010, which was around the time of the purchase of the apartment from the river, and KRW 3,000,000,000,000,000,000 from the loan on February 20, 2013, the defendant should have the obligation to pay the remainder of the debt to the defendant's parents, and then the defendant should have the obligation to pay the remainder of the debt.

According to the evidence Nos. 8 and 10, the parent of the defendant is recognized to have deposited a total of KRW 110 million with the defendant during the period of mixed-party marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant. Meanwhile, the plaintiff's repayment of KRW 100,000,000 as of September 28, 2012 to have paid the loan of KRW 19,000,000,000,000,000 as of April 6, 2004, it is difficult for the plaintiff to receive a donation of KRW 10,000,00 won as the director's expense, and it is hard to view that the plaintiff and the defendant did not have any other evidence to have presented to the defendant that he had paid the loan of KRW 30,00,00,000 from May 19, 201 to the defendant's new bond of KRW 10,000,000 to the defendant.

Therefore, we cannot accept the remainder of the Defendant’s debt obligations, excluding KRW 10,000,000, which are not disputed between the Plaintiff and the Defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da1548, Apr. 1, 200).

(d) Ratio and method of division of property;

1) Division ratio: Plaintiff 40%, Defendant 60%

In a way that the plaintiff and the defendant contributed to the acquisition process and formation and maintenance of the property subject to division as seen earlier, in particular, the plaintiff raised the principal of the case during the marriage period while being in charge of family affairs, and contributed to the family economy by taking care of the plaintiff from the plaintiff's wrong in the process of acquiring and newly constructing the property subject to division. The defendant has supported the plaintiff and the defendant through economic activities during the marriage period, and has received a considerable amount of economic support from the parent of the defendant, the marriage process and period, and the age, occupation, income, livelihood, etc. of the plaintiff and the defendant, as above, shall be determined in consideration of the various circumstances shown in the arguments of the case.

2) Method of division of property

Considering the aforementioned types of property subject to division, the current status of use, the current status of ownership and the process of acquisition, and the various circumstances revealed in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the Plaintiff and the intention of the victim, each of the pertinent property subject to division shall be reverted to the current owner. However, in a case where the value of the property to be reverted to one of the parties exceeds or falls short of the property value to be properly allocated according to his contribution, it is reasonable to pay the amount equivalent to the excess or excess portion as the division of property (the Defendant wishes to transfer the active property under the name of the Defendant to the Plaintiff and to settle the equivalent amount in cash. However, while the Defendant wishes to transfer the property under the name of the Defendant to the Plaintiff and to settle the equivalent amount in cash, it does not seem that the real property under the name of the Defendant does not belong to the blind party because it is surrounded by the Plaintiff’s real estate like the Defendant’s assertion, and considering the topography and market prices of each of the above real property

3) Property division amount to be paid by the Plaintiff to the Defendant: 30,000 won

【Calculation Form】

A) The Plaintiff’s share according to the division rate of property among the net property of the Plaintiff and Defendant

10,000 won X 40% = 70,000 won in total of net property

B) The difference between the money in paragraph (a) above and the Plaintiff’s net property

7. 7, 8.4 million won - 100 million won = 3,16 million won in △△, 1.6 million won

C) Property division amount that the Defendant pays to the Plaintiff

B) the amount of the above subsection 3,1.6 million won

E. Sub-committee

Therefore, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay to the Defendant a property division of KRW 30,160,000 and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum under the Civil Act from the day after the judgment became final to the day after full payment is made.

3. Determination as to the designation of a person with parental authority and a custodian, the claim for child support, and the visitation right claim

A. The part concerning the designation of a person with parental authority and a custodian and the claim for child support

The following circumstances revealed by the evidence: ① during the marriage period, the Plaintiff formed a relative relationship with the principal of this case relatively than the Defendant, and even during the present period, the Plaintiff and the Defendant brought up the principal of this case; ② During the family investigation process, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 400,000 to the Plaintiff, and KRW 500,000 from the following day to the age of the principal of this case; other circumstances: the marriage life and distress of the Plaintiff and the Defendant; the background leading up to the failure; the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s sex and age; the intention of bringing up the principal of this case to the principal of this case; the age of the principal of this case; the fostering environment; the economic capacity of the principal of this case; the equity in charge of the child support; and the guidelines for calculation of the child support of KRW 20,000,000 from the date following the date of the child support of this case to 20,000 to 20,000 won; and the Defendant shall designate the Plaintiff as the person of this case’s parental authority and the child of this case.

B. Part of the visitation right claim

As long as the plaintiff has been designated as a person with parental authority and guardian of the principal of this case, the defendant, who is not a person with parental authority and guardian of the principal of this case, has the right to interview the principal of this case, and, in full view of the facts recognized earlier and the circumstances, the plaintiff and the defendant's intentions, etc., setting the schedule and method of visitation right as stated in paragraph (6) of this case is reasonable for the emotional stability and return of the principal of this case.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for divorce of the principal lawsuit and the defendant's counterclaim divorce claim are accepted for each reason. The plaintiff's claim for consolation money of the principal lawsuit, the defendant's counterclaim claim for consolation money of the principal lawsuit are dismissed for all reasons. It is decided as per Disposition with the above determination that the person with parental authority over the principal lawsuit and counterclaim, the person with parental authority over the child support, the person with parental authority over the child support, and the visitation right.