(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.12 2015가단5155016

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.12 2015가단5155016

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. On August 5, 2013, the Plaintiff and Nonparty C (hereinafter “Nonindicted Party C”) were legally married couples who completed the marriage report, and the agreement was married on November 24, 2015.

Sheet Defendant had lived with the Nonparty from December 2014 to May 12, 2015.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion and the Nonparty maintained a double punishment and difficult marriage. On the early December 2015, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Nonparty came to know that they were living together in an officetel located in the Defendant’s domicile, which is the Defendant’s domicile.

Accordingly, the plaintiff notified the defendant that he was the non-party's father-son and returned to the defendant's domicile on May 12, 2015, and the defendant and the non-party changed the mobile phone numbers in both the defendant and the non-party.

The non-party and the defendant continued to commit unlawful acts, and the third party shall not interfere with the marital community falling under the essence of the marriage by interfering with the other party's marital community life by causing the failure of the married couple's community life. The defendant faced with the plaintiff's family's emotional distress, which makes it impossible to recover to the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant shall pay 30 million won as consolation money in consideration of all circumstances such as the plaintiff's age, the defendant's occupation and income, the period of marital life of the plaintiff and her husband, the circumstances leading up to the marriage, and the degree of the defendant's responsibility.

B. In principle, a third party’s act of infringing on or interfering with a couple’s communal life falling under the essence of marriage and infringing on his/her spouse’s right as a spouse, thereby causing mental pain to the spouse constitutes a tort.

The illegal act here does not reach the passage as a wider concept, including the adultery.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.09.10 2020가단5105916

-서울북부지방법원 2019.05.23 2018가단127894

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.06.02 2019가단5128494

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.09.17 2020가단5004716

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.09.23 2019가단5046509