2014.Joint 443 (principal lawsuit) Damages

2014 Doz. 100862 (Counterclaim)

A

1. B

2. C.

August 14, 2014

August 28, 2014

1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim is dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) shall pay 10,00,000 won to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and 5% per annum from May 22, 2014 to August 28, 2014; and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.

3. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s remaining counterclaim claim and the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s counterclaim claim are dismissed, respectively.

4. Of the costs of lawsuit, the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and 1/6 of the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the remainder by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

5. Paragraph 2 can be provisionally executed.

The principal lawsuit: Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff; hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”) shall pay to each Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant; hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”) 2,00,000 won with 5% per annum from the day following the delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case to the day of the pronouncement of the judgment of this case, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

Counterclaim: The plaintiff shall pay to the defendants 30 million won each and 20% interest per annum from the service date of a copy of the counterclaim of this case to the day of complete payment.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed to be combined.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 201, the Plaintiff and Defendant B continued teaching system after the Plaintiff’s mother and Defendant B’s mother, who were attending the same Section, and Defendant B’s mother and Defendant C’s mother.

B. On the other hand, on May 19, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) married with D and D on May 19, 2013; (b) returned to North Europe on June 10, 2013; (c) reported the marriage on October 15, 2013; and (d) filed a divorce lawsuit against D on October 15, 2013 with the Busan Family Court 2013Dhap2064; and (d) on January 16, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a counterclaim against D as the said court 2014Dhap157, and concluded a conciliation agreement that the Plaintiff paid 25 million won to D on March 17, 2014 by the Busan Family Court to D until April 30, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 18, 27, and 29, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. Summary of the parties' assertion

The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff is liable for compensation for the plaintiff's damage caused by the marriage between the plaintiff and Eul by referring to the false facts that the defendant Eul had a sexual relationship with the plaintiff even after the plaintiff's marriage, and that the plaintiff was liable for the plaintiff's damage caused by the marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant Eul, although the plaintiff was under the premise of marriage with the defendant Eul, not only married with the defendant D but also maintained a sexual relationship with the defendant Eul by concealing the fact of marriage after the marriage, and thereby maintaining a sexual relationship with the defendant Eul, etc., thereby causing mental damage to the defendants. Thus, the plaintiff is liable for compensation to the defendants.

B. Determination

1) Determination on the main claim

According to the Plaintiff’s testimony and the Defendant’s testimony, the Plaintiff’s act of marriage Nos. 1 and 2013 was found to be unlawful, and the Plaintiff’s act of marriage Nos. 1 and 2014 was found to not only because the Plaintiff’s act of marriage Nos. 1 and 30 was false but also the Plaintiff’s act of marriage Nos. 1, 2, 18, and 23 through 35, and the Plaintiff’s act of marriage Nos. 1 and 35 was found to be unlawful, and the Plaintiff’s act of marriage Nos. 1 and 30 was found to have been false and thus, the Plaintiff’s act of marriage No. 1 and 8, and the Plaintiff’s act of marriage No. 1 and the Plaintiff’s act of marriage No. 1 and the Plaintiff’s 8, 2013. The Plaintiff’s act of marriage No. 1 and the Plaintiff’s 8, 2013.

2) Determination on the counterclaim claim

A) Determination as to Defendant B’s claim

(1) Establishment of liability for damages

The right to sexual self-determination refers to the right to choose the other party and have a sexual relationship under his/her own responsibility on the basis of his/her own gender values based on his/her own choice and decision made based on his/her own gender. Although women demand a sexual relationship, even if the other party's gender is actively expressed in the situation, whether the other party has a sexual relationship or not shall be determined on his/her own and shall be held responsible therefor. However, the right to sexual self-determination refers to the right to choose the other party at his/her free will and have a sexual relationship without undue interference, and furthermore, in light of our society's perception of marriage and sexual behavior, evaluation thereof, etc., whether the other party is a married person is a very important basis in choosing the other party to enter into a sexual relationship. One of the acts of actively notifying the other party of his/her marital fact or inducing the other party explicitly or explicitly to omit it constitutes a tort against the other party's sexual self-determination right.

According to the aforementioned facts, the Plaintiff’s series of acts that the Plaintiff concealed such facts to Defendant B, an unmarried female, who was an unmarried female under the premise of marriage even after the legal marriage, and had the Plaintiff think that he/she was a person to marry with his/her parent, and constitutes a tort by interfering with the free decision-making of the Defendant B’s sexual self-determination, thereby infringing on his/her right to sexual self-determination. Therefore, as Defendant B is an unmarried female under the rule of experience, it is obvious that he/she was suffering from mental suffering, and the Plaintiff is obliged to take monetary compensation for mental suffering suffered by Defendant B.

(2) Scope of damages

The amount of consolation money for Defendant B shall be determined as KRW 10 million in consideration of the various circumstances shown in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the developments and period of the teaching system between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B, the frequency of and before and after sexual relations, the mental shock of Defendant B suffered by the Plaintiff, and the age and occupation of the Plaintiff and Defendant B.

As such, the Plaintiff is obligated to claim against Defendant B about the existence and scope of the obligation to perform as of May 22, 2014, the delivery date of a duplicate of the counterclaim of this case, as sought by the Plaintiff, from May 22, 2014 to August 28, 2014, which is the date of the sentencing of this case, to pay 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 date of full payment.

B) Determination as to Defendant C’s claim

Although the Plaintiff’s death on the premise of marriage with Defendant B and continued to serve with Defendant B even after marriage with D as seen earlier, it is difficult to see that the Plaintiff’s above act constitutes a direct infringement of Defendant C’s right, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this differently, the above assertion by Defendant C is without merit without further review.

3. Conclusion

In the end, the plaintiff's claim of the principal lawsuit is dismissed as it is without merit. The defendant B's claim of the counterclaim is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remainder of the counterclaim is dismissed as it is without merit. The plaintiff C's claim of the counterclaim is dismissed as it is so decided as per Disposition.

presiding judge, judge Park Jae-sung

Judge Lee Ro-hoon

Judges 00 00