2014Dhap00 (Counterclaim) Divorce

2. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) shall pay to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Plaintiff) the solatium amounting to KRW 70,00,00,000, and Defendant LACC shall pay the amount calculated by applying each rate of KRW 20,00,000 among the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) sexualB and each of the above amounts, and KRW 20,00,000 among the above amounts, and the amount of KRW 5% per annum from March 29, 2013 to April 10, 2014, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

3. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s claim for the remaining consolation money against the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff) sexualB and the defendant Park PCC is dismissed.

4. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) pays to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) 389,00,000 won as division of property and 5% interest per annum from the day following the day this judgment became final and conclusive to the day of complete payment.

5. Of the costs of lawsuit, the portion arising between the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) B is assessed against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff), 1/3 of whom the total principal claim and counterclaim are filed, and the remainder is assessed against the Defendant (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff)B, respectively. The portion arising between the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant Park LACC is assessed against the Defendant ParkCC.

6. Paragraph 2 can be provisionally executed.

JB and Defendant LAC each of them as solatium 100, 000, 000 won, and this case

Payment of 20% interest per annum from the day after the delivery date of the copy of the complaint to the day of full payment;

Defendant SungB shall have a property division of each real estate listed in the list 1. Attached Form 1. The certified fixed date of this judgment

shall implement the procedure for the registration of transfer of ownership as such.

Counterclaim: The same shall apply to paragraph (1) of this Article.

(a) Facts of recognition;

1) The Plaintiff and the family relationship between the Defendant and the Defendant B had sexualD (19*, 19*, 10, 10.16.16) with the legally married couple who completed the marriage report on October 18, 199, MaternD (19*, 19*, 10.16.1), Matern F (19*, 19*, 10.16.1), MaternG (19*, 5.6.6) with their full majority.

2) Defendant SungB’s illegitimate relationship with the Defendants) came to the beauty art room around 1986, and became aware of Defendant Gamb’s working at the beauty art room, and came to have an illegal relationship from around that time, and Defendant GambCC came to have committed an illegal relationship. < Amended by Act No. 4794, Apr. 4, 1994>

20. The Defendant gave birth of sexual HH between Defendant AB and Defendant AB, and Defendant AB, at the time after the 1986th anniversary of Defendant B’s 1986, returned home to Defendant B, and the Plaintiff did not have a marital relationship.

B) At the time of entering an elementary school, Defendant GamB entered his gender H in the male East’s family register and affixed his family photograph, and Defendant Gamb paid Defendant Gamb’s child support to Defendant GambCC.

C) On January 14, 2013, the Plaintiff told Defendant SungB that he did not have been able to say that he did not have been able to her so that he did not have been able to her so, and Defendant SungB was currently attending IT University, and the Plaintiff was able to her to her in mind how she continued to her women, and the Plaintiff was her in cosmetic and gave birth to her children for 10 years.

D) The Plaintiff: (a) visited Defendant ParkB’s apartment in the high school located near the high school that Defendant PH had in order to verify Defendant PB’s domicile; and (b) visited Defendant LbCC’s apartment; (c) found Defendant PbB’s family photograph with Defendant LbC as Defendant LbCC and sexual HH; (d) on that apartment, Defendant LbCC had conversations with Defendant LbCC as if Defendant had purchased the apartment; and (c) called Defendant LbCC’s marriage 30 years.

E) Around January 26, 2013, Defendant SungB entered into an internal relationship with the Plaintiff, and 29 years of her mother body was concealed today. Monthly salary received in the workplace life was 300 to 400,000 won per month to this wife, and the remaining amount was 300,000 won per month. At the time of the sale of the apartment unit, Defendant SungB provided 10,000 won of 10,000 won of her board of directors and her wife did not live from 40,000 won of her husband and her wife. From 30,000 to 140,000 won of her husband and her husband and her wife her husband and her wife her husband and her wife her wife her husband and her wife her husband and her wife her husband and her wife her her husband and her wife her her husband 2,000 won of her husband and her wife her her her husband 2.

B) On March 20, 2013, Defendant SungB got to undergo treatment to the Synab Synas Hospital located in Seoul, and returned to the request of the Sung FF that caused the said Defendant. However, the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff are also disputing the case, and the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff were demanded to return the withdrawal of shares on March 22, 2013, by reason of the difference between buckbucks and so on.

C) On October 30, 2013, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit seeking divorce against the Defendants. Defendant B filed a counterclaim against the Plaintiff only seeking divorce on February 21, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence No. 1-1, 2, 3, 5, Evidence No. 16-1-3, Evidence No. 3-1, 2-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. Determination

1) A claim for divorce against principal lawsuit and counterclaim: Each of the grounds under Article 840 subparag. 1 (principal lawsuit) and subparag. 6 (Counterclaim) of the Civil Act is with merit (In light of the fact that Defendant SungB committed a fraudulent act from around 1986 and that around March 2013, 2013, the failure of the marriage between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff was the principal cause of the above Defendant’s illegal act, etc., the failure of the marriage between the Plaintiff and the Defendant SungB, who is the responsible spouse, is not allowed as a matter of principle. However, considering that the Plaintiff’s claim for divorce against Defendant SungB as the principal lawsuit in this case is objectively obvious that it has no intention to continue the marriage by filing a claim for divorce, the claim for consolation money against Defendant SungBB is reasonable): 70 million won and delay damages shall be recognized within the scope.

[Grounds for Determination]

(1) Recognition of marital failure

Various circumstances, such as the above recognition, the Plaintiff and the Defendant BB have been separate from March 2013 to the present one year, and the principal lawsuit and counterclaim of this case are filed and their divorce is sought, and the marital relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B appears to have deteriorated to the extent that the marital relationship with the Plaintiff and the Defendant B could not continue their marital life by restoring trust and continuing their marital life.

② In light of the above fact-finding, in particular, the fact that the failure was mainly responsible for Defendant GB, and considering the following circumstances: (a) Defendant GamB started with the illegal relationship from around 1986 to Defendant Gamb; (b) gave birth to Defendant Gamb in 1994; and (c) Defendant Gamb continued de facto de facto marital relationship with the Plaintiff for at least 27 years, including the payment of living expenses to Defendant GambCC and the purchase of apartment houses; and (d) it seriously violated the Plaintiff’s duty

③ The amount of consolation money: The claim for consolation money against Defendant GambCC shall be made within the scope of KRW 20 million and delay damages, taking into account various circumstances, such as the cause and degree of responsibility of the marriage dissolution, the marriage period between the Plaintiff and the Defendant SungB, and the age and economic power of the Plaintiff and the Defendant SungB).

[Grounds for Determination]

As can be seen from the above facts, in light of the empirical rule, it is obvious that the marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant SungB has been broken down due to the defendants' misconduct that had been maintained in a mixed de facto marital relationship for a long time, and that the plaintiff has suffered considerable mental suffering. As such, it is reasonable to determine the amount of consolation money as KRW 20 million to the plaintiff as joint tortfeasor, taking into account all the circumstances such as the plaintiff and the defendant SungB's marriage period, the circumstances leading up to the failure of the above marriage, the degree of responsibility of the defendant ParkbCC, and the financial status of the plaintiff and the defendant ParkbCC.

C. Sub-committee

Therefore, according to the principal lawsuit and counterclaim, the plaintiff and the defendant BB are divorced, and the defendant SungB is the consolation money to the plaintiff, and the defendant LACC is the consolation money, and the defendant LACC is the 20 million won out of the defendant SungB and each of the above money, and each of them is delivered to the defendants from March 29, 2013, which is the day following the delivery of a duplicate of the complaint of this case to the defendants, it is reasonable to resist the existence and scope of the defendants' obligations. < Amended by Act No. 12248, Apr. 4, 2014>

10. By the time limit, 5% per annum under the Civil Act and 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment shall be liable to pay damages for delay calculated.

2. Determination as to the claim for division of property

A. 1) During the marriage period, Defendant SungB worked in Busan ○○○○○, received monthly salary, and provided the Plaintiff with school expenses for children’s livelihood, and the Plaintiff provided assistance to the Plaintiff, taking exclusive charge of household affairs and parenting, and Defendant SungB provided support to the Plaintiff, and Defendant SungB paid the Plaintiff a reduced amount of living expenses and paid the remainder of monthly salary and earnings. 2) The Plaintiff and Defendant SungB had an interest in real estate investment since around 1986, and Defendant SungB maintained the market price profits by selling real estate on several occasions, while selling the real estate under the name of Defendant SungB, left the market price profits under each of the following names of Plaintiff and Defendant SungBB.

가 ) 원고와 피고 성BB는 피고 성BB 명의로 1987년경 부산 ①①군 ①①읍 ◆◆리 소재 밭 400평을 평당 64, 000 ~ 65, 000원에 매수하여 평당 15만 원에 매도함으로써 3, 400만 원 이상의 시세차익 ( 원고는 시세차익이 5, 800만 원이었다고 주장함 ) 을 얻었다 .나 ) 원고와 피고 성BB는 피고 성BB 명의로 1983년경 부산 ①①군 ①①읍 ○○리 소재 토지 400평을 5인이 공동으로 평당 20만 원에 매수하여 도시구획정리사업으로 토지 일부를 환지 받아 이를 1987년경 평당 350만 원에 처분하는 등으로 1억 1, 600만 원 이상의 시세차익 ( 원고는 시세차익이 1억 2, 600만 원이었다고 주장함 ) 을 얻었다 .

C) The Plaintiff and Defendant SungB, under the name of Defendant SungB, purchased KRW 150,00,000 on the land adjacent to the Busan District ① 1.50,000 square meters on the logistics warehouse located in Eup ○○○○, in collaboration with SungJ, and thereafter sold it in KRW 2,10,000 per square year after three years, thereby obtaining profits from the market price of KRW 50,000 or more per square year (the Plaintiff asserted that the gains from the market price of KRW 61,00,000,000).

라 ) 원고와 피고 성BB는 1984년경 피고 성BB 명의로 부산 동래구 ◆◆동 소재 토지 46평을 평당 55 ~ 60만 원에 매수하여 그 지상에 건물을 신축하고 그 후 이를 처분하여 5, 000만 원 상당 시세차익 ( 원고는 8, 000만 원의 시세차익을 얻었다고 주장함 ) 을 얻었다 .

마 ) 원고와 피고 성BB는 부산 ①①군 ①①읍 ★리 ○○ - 1 논 400평을 평당 5만 원에 매수하였는데 도시구획정리사업으로 180평을 환지받은 후 일부 토지를 추가로 매수하여 같은 리 ○○ - 1 대 751. 5㎡에 관하여 1987. 3. 6. 원고 앞으로 소유권이전등기를 마쳤고 위 토지 지상에 2007. 9. 경 건물을 신축하여 원고 앞으로 소유권보존등기를 마쳤다 ( 이하 위 토지 및 건물을 ' ①①군 부동산 ' 이라 한다 ). 원고는 위 건물을 임대하여 차임을 직접 수령하고 관리하였다 .

바 ) 원고와 피고 성BB는 부산 동래구 ◆◆동 소재 토지를 평당 55만 원에 매수하여 그 지상에 2층 건물을 신축하여 그 곳에서 거주하다가 1987년경 매매대금 1억 5, 000만 원 ( 평당 300만 원 ) 에 위 토지 및 건물을 매도하였고 위 돈 등으로 1993. 6. 경울산 남구 ●●동 ○○ - 1 대 329. 6m를 평당 250만 원에 매수하여 피고 성BB 앞으로 소유권이전등기를 마치고 2008. 10. 경 위 토지상에 2층 건물을 신축하여 피고 성BB 앞으로 소유권보존등기를 마쳤는데 ( 이하 위 토지 및 건물을 ' 울산 ●● 동 부동산 ' 이라 한다 ), 피고 성BB는 위 건물을 임대하여 차임을 직접 수령하고 관리하였다 .

사 ) 원고와 피고 성BB는 ①①군 소재 부동산을 매도한 돈 등으로 부산 동래구 ◆◆동 ○○ - 6 대 281㎡ 및 그 지상 건물을 매수하여 1989. 6. 15. 피고 성BB 앞으로 소유권이전등기를 마쳤고 그 후로 원고와 피고 성BB는 그 곳에서 거주하였다 ( 이하 위 토지 및 건물을 ' ◆◆동 부동산 ' 이라 한다 ) .

H) The Plaintiff and Defendant SungB purchased the shares of Defendant SungB, ○○ K apartment ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, etc. (hereinafter referred to as “KK apartment”) on December 3, 1996, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on December 3, 1996. (3) The Plaintiff secured Gun real estate (i.e., losses arising from investment in stocks) from the National Bank of Korea (hereinafter referred to as the “National Bank of Korea”), Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “National Bank”), a loan of KRW 130 million on October 1, 2007, and completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage on the said real estate, and completed the said loan of KRW 60 million on October 28, 2008, and completed the said loan of KRW 100 million on the said real estate with the maximum debt amount of KRW 130 million on the said bank, and completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage on the said real estate.

B) Defendant B obtained loans of KRW 130 million from the National Bank on November 6, 2008 from the U.S. as collateral, and completed the registration of creation of a mortgage over the said real estate, which was made up of KRW 1660,900,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,00.

다 ) 피고 성BB는 2010. 8. 11. 국민은행으로부터 7, 500만 원을 대출받으면서 ● ◆동 부동산에 관하여 위 은행 앞으로 채권최고액 9, 000만 원, 채무자 피고 성BB로 된 근저당권설정등기를 마쳐주었고, 그 무렵 위 대출금 중 7, 000만 원을 주식에 투자하였으나 손실을 보았다 .

D) On August 11, 2010, Defendant SungB borrowed KRW 65 million from the National Bank, and completed the registration of creation of a mortgage over K apartment in the future of the above bank with respect to the above KK apartment, and around that time, Defendant SungB invested KRW 60 million out of the above loan, but incurred losses, while leasing the above apartment, it was paid KRW 235 million with the deposit for lease, and used KRW 120 million out of it as the money for marriage of F (the money for lease) and other circumstances.

Defendant SungB discussed the issue of withdrawing divorce and preservative measures against the above Defendant during the course of the instant lawsuit between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff during the instant lawsuit, and upon the Plaintiff’s request, on January 28, 2004.

SK Securities Co., Ltd., holding 400 shares of the Ack (amounted to 54,200,000) held in the name of the above defendant, and 400 shares of the Hyundai Steel (amount assessed to 30,200,00 won) in the name of the plaintiff. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 25139, Feb. 2, 2014>

3. Treatment Securities Co., Ltd.: 215 (the appraised value per share of KRW 68,10, total of KRW 14,641,50), 60 (the appraised value per share of KRW 26,75, total of KRW 1,606,50), 40 shares in first class (the appraised value of KRW 118,307, total of KRW 4,732,280), 100 shares in first class (the appraised value of KRW 125,750, total of KRW 12,575, KRW 00, KRW 128, KRW 400, KRW 500, KRW 305, KRW 500, KRW 80, KRW 500, KRW 50, KRW 30, KRW 50, KRW 50, KRW 50, KRW 505, KRW 130, KRW 50, KRW 505, KRW 1305, KRW 1505.

(b) Object and value of division of property;

2. Attached Form 2 as shown in the detailed statement of the property division;

[Ground for recognition] Gap evidence 4-1 to 3, 6, 9, and 10-1, each evidence Nos. 2, 23, Eul evidence Nos. 10-1 to 10, 11, Eul evidence Nos. 12-1 to 10, 12-1 to 12, this court's order to submit each financial transaction information to the National Bank of Korea, the SK Securities Co., Ltd., and the SK Securities Co., Ltd., and the court's order to submit each financial transaction information to the SK Securities Co., Ltd. on March 25, 2013, the result of the order to submit financial transaction information, and the whole pleadings. The parties' assertion and judgment as to the property subject to division are the purport of the appeal.

Attached 2. List of Details of Divided Property and Attached 3. List of Non-Recognized Property, as stated in the column of "party's assertion and determination."

D. Division ratio and method of division of property: Plaintiff 55% and Defendant BB 45%

[Ground of determination] Defendant B continuously created household income throughout the marriage period, and the Plaintiff was in full charge of household expenses and reduced household expenses. The Plaintiff and Defendant B appears to have made substantial profits through investment in real estate or stock investment, and most of their current assets were formed based on these efforts. Defendant B invested 395 million won in stocks as collateral but reduced its considerable property as loss ( Defendant B suffered loss of 60 million won or more as total as stock investment), and Defendant B suffered loss of 160 million won or more as stock investment, but it was less than Defendant B's losses than Defendant B, Defendant B continued to have an unlawful relationship with Defendant GB for 27 years or more, the Plaintiff and Defendant B presumed to have made considerable contributions to the Plaintiff and the property subject to division to the extent that it has been assumed that the current status of the property subject to division and the present status of the property subject to division, including the acquisition of the property under the name of the Plaintiff and the present status of the property subject to division and the present status of the property subject to division.

3) Property division amount to be paid by Defendant SungB to the Plaintiff: KRW 460 million

[Calculation Form] ① The Plaintiff’s share of net property between the Plaintiff and Defendant BB according to the division rate of property

x55% of the sum of net assets of the Plaintiff and Defendant BB 2,715, 795, 792 = 1,493, 687, 685

② The amount calculated by deducting the Plaintiff’s net property from the money under the above paragraph (1) 1, 493, 687, 685 won - 1,104, 524, and 592 won = 389, 163, and 093 < Amended by Act No. 3893, Mar. 163, 093>

② The amount of KRW 380,000,000,000,000,000

E. Sub-committee

Therefore, Defendant SungB is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 389 million won as division of property and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act from the day following the day when this judgment became final and conclusive to the day of full payment.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the claim for divorce between the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim of this case is justified, and the plaintiff's claim for consolation money against the defendants is accepted within the scope of each above recognition, each claim for consolation money is dismissed as it is without merit, and the claim for division of property is determined as above. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges 00 00

Judges Cho Jae-jin

33,900,000 won (an appraised amount of 56,500 won per share as of December 31, 2012) and the disposal proceeds of 900 shares of Samsung Electric Stock (the disposal proceeds of 56,500 shares of Samsung Electric Stock) from December 31, 2012 to July 9, 2013.

Until December 31, 2012, the sum of KRW 89,280,00 per share (as of December 31, 2012, KRW 99,200 per share)

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.