logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.05.24 2018가단5215841
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 30,000,000 and its related amount are 5% per annum from November 6, 2018 to May 24, 2019 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff has two children (one gender, one minor, and one minor) under the chain of a married couple who completed the marriage report with C in 1991.

B. The Defendant, with knowledge that C is a spouse, has maintained the relationship between C and C by frequently receiving messages from around 2017 to September 2018, and by having sexual intercourse with C.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 to 8, images, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

(a) A third party shall not interfere with a marital life which corresponds to the nature of the marriage, such as intervening in a marital life of another person and causing a failure of the marital life;

In principle, a third party's act of infringing on a couple's communal life falling under the essence of marriage or interfering with the maintenance thereof and infringing on the right as the spouse's right to it and causing mental pain to the spouse shall constitute a tort.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu297).

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant committed an unlawful act with C, thereby infringing upon the plaintiff's communal living or interfering with the maintenance of the plaintiff's marital life and infringing on the plaintiff's spouse's right. Thus, the defendant has a duty to compensate for mental damage

C. Furthermore, considering all the circumstances shown in the pleadings of the instant case, such as health team, the period of marriage and family relationship between the Plaintiff and C, the content and degree of the unlawful act committed by the Defendant and C, the period, and the influence of the Defendant’s improper act on the Plaintiff’s marital life, it is reasonable to determine the amount of consolation money as KRW 30 million.

3. In conclusion, the Defendant’s performance obligation exists from November 6, 2018, which is the day following the delivery of a copy of the instant complaint sought by the Plaintiff as to consolation money of KRW 30,000,000 to the Plaintiff.

arrow