logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2020.07.07 2019가단150037
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The defendant's KRW 10,000,000 and about this, 5% per annum from January 14, 2020 to July 7, 2020 to the plaintiff, and the following.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 10, 2012, the Plaintiff and C have three minor children among the married couple under the law who completed the marriage report.

B. The Defendant, despite being aware that C is a spouse, committed an illegal relationship, such as having sexual intercourse several times from November 2018 to March 2019 with C while performing an educational task with C.

[Based on recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence 1-5 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts finding that the Defendant committed an unlawful act with C, and thereby infringing upon the Plaintiff’s and C’s right to life or interfere with their maintenance and his spouse’s right, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for emotional distress inflicted upon the Plaintiff.

B. Considering the various circumstances indicated in the argument of the instant case, such as the scope of liability for damages and the marriage period between the Plaintiff and C, the period, content, and degree of fraudulent act between the Defendant and C, and the impact of fraudulent act on the marital life of the Plaintiff and C, it is reasonable to determine the amount of consolation money to be paid to the Plaintiff as KRW 10,000.

C. Accordingly, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the consolation money of KRW 10,00,00 with compensation for damages caused by a tort, and the damages for delay calculated by 12% per annum under the Civil Act from January 14, 2020 following the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case filed by the plaintiff after the date of the tort, to July 7, 2020, which is deemed reasonable to dispute about the existence and scope of the defendant's duty of performance.

3. As such, the plaintiff's claim is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow