beta
Text
1. The Defendants: (a) KRW 12,00,000 for each Plaintiff; and (b) 5% per annum from August 6, 2014 to April 17, 2015 for each Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The facts of recognition that the plaintiff completed the marriage report with the defendant C on December 17, 1993, and that the defendant B is a person of legal spouse who has completed the marriage report with the defendant D may be recognized by the statements in the evidence Nos. 1 to 3.
2. Plaintiff’s assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion from April 2013 to April 2013, Defendant C committed unlawful acts, such as establishing an internal relationship with Defendant B, and thereby, the marriage between the Plaintiff and the Defendant C went bankrupt. The Plaintiff suffered emotional distress due to such unlawful acts by the Defendants.
Therefore, the Defendants are liable to pay the Plaintiff the solatium amounting to KRW 50 million and the damages for delay.
B. The phrase “illegal act” under Article 840 subparag. 1 of the Civil Act refers to an act of infringing on or interfering with the common life of the married couple falling under the essence of marriage and causing emotional distress to the spouse by infringing on the rights of the spouse as the spouse, and as a matter of principle, a third party is liable to compensate for damages to the spouse who has suffered emotional distress, as a matter of principle, since it constitutes a tort on the part of the spouse who has suffered emotional distress by infringing on or impeding the maintenance of common life of the married couple falling under the essence of marriage and by infringing on the rights of the spouse (see Supreme Court Decision 92Meu68, Nov. 10, 192).
(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997 Decided November 20, 2014). Regarding the instant case, the following facts recognized by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings as follows: (a) the custody certificate issued by the laundry Enterprise “E” was discovered at the office of Defendant B; (b) there was a statement in the custody certificate that the “F” operated by the Defendant C was in charge of the laundry on April 3, 2013; and (c) the Defendants were in charge of the laundry on April 3, 2013.