beta
Text
1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 21,600,000, and 5% per annum from May 17, 2017 to February 1, 2018, and the next day.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On January 19, 2015, the Plaintiff reported the marriage with the Defendant under the Plaintiff’s birth of C (name D before the name of the Plaintiff), and upon the birth of E C, registered C in the family relation register as its natural father.
Decisions
1. The plaintiff and the defendant are divorced.
2. The Plaintiff shall pay 10 million won as consolation money, division of property, and child support to the Defendant until June 30, 2016, and if the payment is delayed, the Plaintiff shall pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the day following the above payment date to the day of full payment.
4. The defendant shall be designated as a person with parental authority and custody of C;
5. The defendant does not claim the child support of C against the plaintiff.
6. The plaintiff may visit C at a place designated by the defendant, such as the defendant's place of residence, etc. from 10:00 to 14:00 each month, and the defendant shall actively cooperate therewith.
7. Except as provided above, the plaintiff and the defendant shall not claim monetary against the other party in relation to the divorce of this case under any name, such as consolation money and division of property.
8. The defendant shall waive the remaining claims.
B. Meanwhile, in the case of divorce, etc. brought by the Defendant against the Plaintiff on June 30, 2015, the Plaintiff divorced with the Defendant on May 17, 2016, where the decision of recommending reconciliation was finalized on June 2, 2016, as follows.
C. From December 6, 2015 to April 27, 2016, the Plaintiff paid a total of 1.6 million won to the Defendant as child support for the aforementioned divorce case.
(Separate in Paragraph 2 of the above Decision of Recommendation for Compromise)
The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C to confirm the existence of paternity by the Incheon Family Court No. 2017ddan101782, and the above court was born between the Defendant and another male. However, even though C on June 9, 2017, the Defendant was aware of the Plaintiff’s birth to C’s birth father, and the Plaintiff was recorded as C’s father on the family relation register but the result of genetic testing.