logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.08.17 2018가단5674
청구이의의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 10, 2015, the Defendant, a domestic marriage broker, entered into a contract between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff as a member of the domestic marriage brokerage B (hereinafter “the instant first contract”). The Defendant, as the member of the Plaintiff, provided the Plaintiff with a total of 2,145,000 won for 12 months (from March 10, 2015 to March 10, 2016). On March 19, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 2,145,000 to the Defendant as the member of the Plaintiff.

B. On the other hand, on March 19, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for domestic marriage brokerage B member (hereinafter “instant secondary contract”) under which the Plaintiff would pay KRW 220,000 to the Defendant for the period of 36 months (from April 10, 2015 to April 10, 2018) without any limit to the number of times, and the main contents are as follows.

1. Genderous honorarium: 5.5 million won per annum shall be paid within 30 days after the marriage between members.

sexual intercourse means a case of determining the date of marriage or filing a report of marriage before marriage, which means the case of commencing the living together.

(Provided, That if the expenses for sexual intercourse are not paid within 30 days, it shall be paid twice the above expenses for sexual intercourse)

2. If the plaintiff becomes aware of sexual intercourse under the previous contract, it will enter into the contract on this day due to the inconvenience of additional visits at the time of a separate contract and settle the settlement for convenience in advance.

C. In accordance with the instant first contract, the Defendant arranged three times to the Plaintiff for the remainder with women, and arranged to the Plaintiff as a member of the Defendant, pursuant to the instant second contract, who did not have sexual intercourse, again arranged to the Plaintiff for the remainder with women, according to the instant second contract, and arranged to the Plaintiff for the remainder with E, a member of the Defendant around September 2015.

After that, the Plaintiff married with the above E around October 9, 2017.

The Plaintiff did not pay to the Defendant the amount of KRW 5.5 million based on the second contract of this case, and did not pay the amount of sexual intercourse within 30 days.

arrow