logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.02.11 2014나53086
위자료
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to pay below shall be revoked.

The defendant.

Reasons

1. The plaintiff's assertion is the legal spouse who completed the marriage report on May 13, 1987 with C and C, and the defendant committed an unlawful act, such as accepting the marriage report with C and C, thereby causing the failure of the marriage between the plaintiff and C, so the defendant shall pay consolation money of KRW 50,000,000 to the plaintiff.

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. In principle, a third party's act of infringing on or interfering with a couple's communal life falling under the essence of marriage by committing an unlawful act with the spouse, and infringing on the spouse's right as the spouse, thereby causing mental pain to the spouse constitutes a tort.

(Supreme Court en banc Decision 2011Meu2997 Decided November 20, 2014). On the other hand, a spouse’s wrongful act includes livers, but does not reach a common sense, as a broad concept, refers to any act that is not familiar with the husband’s duty of good faith.

(Supreme Court Decision 2002Meu678 Delivered on December 6, 2002). B.

According to the overall purport of evidence Nos. 5 through 15, C sent a note to the Plaintiff on September 12, 2012, from May 2012 to August 2012, 2012, C had contact with the Defendant, including approximately KRW 2,00 calls or letters, etc., C went to Gwangju residing several times from May 2012 to July 2012; the Defendant continued contact with C from November 2012 to August 2013; C sent a note to the Plaintiff on September 12, 2012 to the effect that the Defendant committed an unlawful act with the Defendant; the Plaintiff may have actively participated in a divorce and consolation money, etc. under the Incheon District Court Branch Branch Decision 2014D9406; and according to the above, C actively participated with the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s spouse’s unlawful act; the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s spouse were also aware of such unlawful act; and C did so.

arrow