[1] The meaning of "legal act concerning daily household affairs" under Article 832 of the Civil Code and the standard for its determination

[2] The case holding that the obligation of the sum of KRW 40,00,000 borne by the wife is the obligation under the necessity of the wife's business rather than the obligation due to ordinary family affairs included in the ordinary business affairs of the married community

[1] A juristic act related to daily home affairs under Article 832 of the Civil Code refers to a juristic act related to the ordinary affairs required in the community of a married couple. The specific scope is not only the social status, property, and revenue capacity of the married couple, but also the custom of the community, which is the place of the living of the married couple. However, in determining whether the specific juristic act is a juristic act related to the daily home affairs of the married couple, it should be determined not only by the internal circumstance of the married couple community or the individual purpose of the act, but also by the objective type, character, etc. of the juristic act.

[2] The case holding that the obligation of the sum of KRW 40,00,000 borne by the wife is the obligation under the necessity of the wife's business rather than the obligation due to ordinary family affairs included in the ordinary business affairs of the married community

[1] Article 832 of the Civil Act / [2] Article 832 of the Civil Act

[1] Supreme Court Decision 97Da31229 delivered on November 28, 1997 (Gong1998Sang, 77) Supreme Court Decision 98Da46877 delivered on March 9, 199 (Gong199Sang, 637)

St. L. L.C.

Defendant (Attorney Kim Young-chul et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Daejeon District Court Decision 99Na1077 delivered on December 23, 1999

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. The term "legal act with respect to daily home affairs" under Article 832 of the Civil Act refers to a legal act with respect to ordinary affairs necessary in the community of a married couple. The specific scope is not only the social status, property, and revenue capacity of the married couple, but also the custom of the community, which is the place of the living of the married couple. However, in determining whether the specific legal act is a legal act with respect to daily home affairs, it shall be determined by considering not only the internal circumstance of the married couple community, or the individual purpose of the act, but also the objective type, character, etc. of the legal act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 97Da3129, Nov. 28, 1997; 98Da46877, Mar. 9, 199).

2. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below rejected the non-party's assertion that the non-party's obligation of this case was a basic living expenses and educational expenses for his family members to maintain their basic living. Since it was actually used as living expenses for the defendant's husband and wife, it is difficult to believe that the defendant should be jointly and severally liable with the above non-party. Based on the evidence adopted, the defendant was standing around 1986, and the non-party and the non-party were reappointed in around 1989. The defendant continued to operate a restaurant at the defendant's building after marriage, and the non-party was not aware that the non-party's obligation of this case was non-party's 10 billion won and the non-party's obligation was non-party's 9 billion won and the non-party's obligation was non-party's 9 billion won and the non-party's obligation was non-party's share of money borrowed from the defendant's bank since 1995 and the non-party's share of this case's 10 billion won.

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee In-bok-hee and Lee Jin-hun (Presiding Justice)