(영문) 서울가정법원 2015.3.25.선고 2013드합303467 판결

2. All of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)’s claim of consolation money and Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff)’s counterclaim damages claim are dismissed.

3. Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) pays 69,000,000 won to Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) as division of property.

4. A person with parental authority and a custodian of the principal of the case shall designate the Plaintiff (a counterclaim Defendant).

5. Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) is the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)’s child support for the principal of the instant case from March 2015 to May 2029.

18. By the end of each month pay 1,600,000 Won per month.

6. A. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) may visitation the principal of the case as follows until the principal of the case becomes adult.

1) The second day of each month, the fourth day from 00 to 17:00 the following day) each year during the period of the snow and the memorial holiday, and the second day of each month, the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) will take the principal of the case in the dwelling of the principal of the case and take it back again into the above dwelling.

4) Each of the above schedule and method can be changed by subsequent consultation following the growth of the principal of the case, and will be implemented by respecting the intent of the principal of the case to the maximum extent possible.

B. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) must actively cooperate with the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) in exercising the visitation right to the principal of the instant case.

7. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the remainder, respectively, by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

8. Paragraph 5 can be provisionally executed.

Purport of claim

Main Action: Disposition Nos. 1 and 4 and Defendant (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”) are Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant, hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”)

H. 50,000,000 won as consolation money and a copy of the complaint in this case to the plaintiff's 's 's only' and 's 'the plaintiff'

From the date of service to the date of rendering a judgment in this case, 5% per annum and from the next day to the date of full payment.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 300,000,000

D. The Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff the child support of the principal of this case from the day following the sentencing date of this case.

Before the principal of the case becomes an adult, 3 million won will be paid on the last day of each month.

Counterclaim: Claim 1 of this Decree and Claim 30,000,000 won as consolation money to the defendant and the plaintiff

5% per annum from the day after the date of service of a copy of the counterclaim to the date of rendering the judgment of this case, and 0% from the next day.

B. A property division shall be paid at a rate of 20% per annum until the date of full payment. The plaintiff shall divide the property to the defendant.

Ro 203,00,000 won and the interest thereon shall be from the day following the day when the judgment of this case is finalized to the day of complete payment.

d. Designation of the Defendant as a person with parental authority and a custodian for the principal of this case.

(1) The Plaintiff’s child support for the principal of this case was rendered to the Defendant until February 28, 2023.

900,000 won, from March 1, 2023 to February 28, 2029, 1,100,000 won on the last day of each month, respectively.

D. D. D. D.

Reasons

1. Determination on the divorce of each principal lawsuit and counterclaim and each claim for consolation money

(a) Facts of recognition;

1) Marriage and children: Report of marriage on October 18, 2003; Report of marriage on October 18, 2003; Report of marriage to C (the birth and birth of 2010) with children; 2) the Plaintiff and the Defendant came to know that they were working together in the same workplace around 1997. Around September 25, 2003.

B) The Plaintiff was dissatisfied with the Defendant on the ground that the Defendant was unable to live home at the night due to work, drinking, etc. and that he did not help the Defendant properly take care of house affairs and childcare. The Plaintiff was dissatisfied with the Defendant on January 14, 2011 at California 1.

'Matiln. Does there be no wish for each person's life? We accept the reality. '.' and March 3, 201.

15. "Lebage, telephone, and so on." They must be prepared only in the form of . ? , and March 17, 201.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant, from the date of marriage, set up a marriage with the Defendant’s incompetence and disregarding his incompetence. On the other hand, the Defendant did not understand the Defendant’s situation, which had to have to be returned to the Republic of Korea late due to the company’s work and commuting to the long distance, but rather demanded divorce and separate living, and the Defendant did not appropriately gather the property due to the loan interest and burden due to the reckless economic life and unreasonable apartment purchase, and did not bring a complaint. The Plaintiff and the Defendant, from the date of marriage, had they fightd with each other due to their respective complaints, character and method of living as above.

C) The Defendant returned home to Korea on August 2012 more than 3:00 new walls, and returned to Korea on September 2012.

12. In short, more than 6 cc of a new wall, the Plaintiff asked the Plaintiff to return home, but the Plaintiff failed to properly address the Defendant’s doubt, and the Defendant also notified the Plaintiff’s mother of the fact of gambling in writing.

D) From around the above time, the Plaintiff rejected the marital relationship with the Defendant for more than one year, and the Defendant was unable to understand this. On July 3, 2013, the Plaintiff’s refusal of marital relationship from the Plaintiff, resulting in dispute between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, entering a bath room, leaving the instant cup, and shouldering them. Ultimately, the Plaintiff and the Defendant decided to divorce at the end of July 2013.

E) As the conflict between the Plaintiff and the Defendant deepens, around August 2013, the Defendant’s mother began to reside together with the Plaintiff’s mother and the Defendant, and accordingly, the Plaintiff’s mother began to live together with the Plaintiff’s home from October 2013 to the Plaintiff’s mother. The Plaintiff sent to the Defendant on October 25, 2013, an e-mail to the effect that, considering the circumstances such as fostering the principal of the case, one half of the living cost was borne by the Plaintiff, and without interfering with one another’s privacy, the Plaintiff maintained a marital life. However, on October 28, 2013, the Plaintiff sent the e-mail to the Defendant.

The defendant's arnae found at home and the plaintiff's mother and the plaintiff's mother were called to the police. On November 1, 2013, the plaintiff notified the defendant of his intention of divorce again.

F) On November 14, 2013, the Plaintiff brought an action in this case on December 17, 2013, with the Defendant’s shouldering the principal of the case, thereby doing so. The Plaintiff brought an action in this case on December 17, 2013, and thereafter on December 2, 2013.

26. The home and the Defendant began to be separated from the case principal.

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 11, 18, 24, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 7, family affairs investigator's investigation report, and purport of the whole pleadings

B. Determination as to the claim of divorce and consolation money respectively against the principal lawsuit and counterclaim

1) Claim for divorce of principal lawsuit and counterclaim: Each of the grounds under Article 840 subparagraph 6 of the Civil Act exists. 2) Claim for consolation money and counterclaim respectively: Each of the grounds is without merit.

[Reasons for Determination] A) Recognition of the failure of marriage between the Plaintiff and the Defendant

위 인정사실과 같이 원 · 피고가 이 사건 본소와 반소를 통하여 서로 이혼을 원하고 있으며, 원 · 피고의 관계가 회복될 수 없을 정도로 악화된 것으로 보이는 점 등의 여러 사정 참작나 ) 파탄의 근본적이고 주된 책임은 원 · 피고 쌍방에게 있고 그 정도가 대등함 부부는 혼인생활을 함에 있어서 애정과 신의 및 인내로써 서로 상대방을 이해하며 보호하여 혼인생활의 유지를 위한 최선의 노력을 기울여야 하는 것이고, 혼인생활 중에 그 장애가 되는 여러 사태에 직면하는 경우가 있다 하더라도 그러한 장애를 극복하기 위한 노력을 다하여야 함에도 ( 대법원 1999. 2. 12. 선고 97므612 판결 참조 ) , 원고와 피고는, 원고와 시댁 식구들과의 관계 문제, 경제적인 문제, 성격 차이, 직장업무 등으로 인한 서로간의 갈등을 대화로써 해결하거나 상대방을 배려하고 관계를 개선하려는 노력을 충분히 다하지 아니한 채 서로 자신의 입장만을 내세웠고, 혼인생활의 갈등을 스스로 해결하지 못하고 각자의 부모를 개입시킴으로써 양가 친척들끼리의 극한 갈등으로까지 확대시킨 점, 그 이후로도 원고와 피고는 여전히 원가족에게 의지한 채 상호간 관계회복을 위하여 충분한 노력을 기울이지 않은 점 등을 종합하여 보면 , 그 파탄의 책임은 원고와 피고 모두에게 대등하게 있음 .

C. Sub-committee

Therefore, the plaintiff and the defendant are divorced by the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim, and all of the plaintiff's claims for consolation money and the defendant's counterclaim are dismissed.

2. Determination on the claim for division of property at the principal lawsuit

(a) The plaintiff and the defendant on October 7, 2003 ** old*** Dong** ○○○○ 201 Dong*** on February 13, 2012 while living in the mountain village *** Gu** * * 101 Dong * on October 30, 2003 ** * on October 30, 2003 ** the plaintiff acquired the ownership of the above *** * * * * * the old * * * the old * * * the old * * * the old * * the old * * * the old * * the * * * the * * the * * * the * * the * * the * * the * * the * * the * * the * * the * * the * the * * the * * the * * the * * * the * * * the * *. *. *.

12. Apr. 81, 200, 00 won was sold before marriage****** on Nov. 13, 2012 while holding 122, 400, and 100 shares, each of the above shares was sold to 122, 400, and the above shares was sold to 19 Feb. 19, 2013.

** The Plaintiff’s mother repaid KRW 100,00,000 out of loans to banks, KRW 435,00,000, and KRW 35,000 on April 9, 2013. The Plaintiff’s mother, on December 4, 2006, promoted from the Defendant to the Defendant ** * a car-a-car.

3) The Plaintiff, except for the period from May 2010 to November 2010, and from August 2011 to May 2012, 201, ************ while working in Co., Ltd.*********, and the Defendant bears double-income living expenses. At present, the Plaintiff’s monthly income including bonuses is approximately KRW 7 million, and the Defendant’s monthly income including bonuses is about KRW 12 million.

B. Property to be divided and value 1) Property to be divided: Each property indicated in the list of property statements to be divided in annexed Form 1 is subject to division of property, in full view of the circumstances revealed in the pleadings, such as the process of property formation as seen earlier, the process of acquisition of the pertinent property, and the extent of income and living expenses during the marriage period between the plaintiff and the defendant, which are the property formed or maintained by joint efforts of the plaintiff and the defendant during the marriage, and they are actually common property of the plaintiff and the defendant, or are borne by the formation of

2) The value of the Plaintiff’s net property: 61,057, 660 won, the Defendant’s net property: 200,000,000 won: 261,057,660 won, the Defendant’s net property:

[Ground of recognition] Each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 3, 5, 6, 7, 25, and Gap evidence Nos. 13 through 15 (including each number), family affairs investigator's investigation report, and the whole purport of pleadings. Determination of the parties' assertion on the property subject to division

Attached Table 2 'Evidence of Property List' and 'Judgment of the Parties'' for the relevant parties' for the reasons stated in the column and the Schedule of Property Unauthorizedd in Attached Form 2.

D. Division ratio of property and method 1): Plaintiff 50%, Defendant 50%

[2] The method of division of property, based on the circumstances shown in the pleadings of this case, such as the formation and maintenance of the property subject to division as above, the degree of contribution by the defendant, the process and period of marital life, the age of the plaintiff and the defendant, and occupation: considering the name and form of the property subject to division, the reason for acquisition and use of the property, the convenience of division, etc., the part of the amount ultimately attributable to the plaintiff pursuant to the above division ratio is determined to be paid in cash by the defendant to the plaintiff; 69,000,000 won in the division amount to be paid by the defendant to the plaintiff

[Calculation Form] A) The Plaintiff’s share of net property of the Plaintiff and Defendant according to the division ratio of property

Property division amount to be paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiff in 261,05, 660 won 】 50% = 130,528,830 won - 61,057, 660 won = 69,471, 170 won)

B) The amount of the above subsection 69,00,000,000

E. Sub-committee

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay 69,000,000 won to the division of property, as requested by the plaintiff.

3. Determination as to the principal lawsuit and counterclaim person with parental authority and child support claim, visitation right (ex officio)

(a) Person with parental authority and custodian: Designating a plaintiff;

[Grounds for determination] The Plaintiff is raising the principal of the case from May 2010 to November 2010 and from August 201 to May 201, 201 through maternity leave, childcare leave, etc. to May 2012, taking into account the following circumstances: the Plaintiff’s age, gender, details of fostering, and environment, etc.

(b) Child support;

From March 3, 2015 to May 18, 2029, the day before the principal of the case becomes adult, the Defendant paid 1,600,000 won per month to the Plaintiff as the child support of the principal of the case on the last day of each month (based on judgment] the age and status of the principal of the case, the age of the original and the defendant, the age of the original and the defendant, the occupation, the economic condition after division of property, the calculation standard for child support, which was enacted and published by the Seoul Family Court on May 30, 2014, and other various circumstances.

C. The visitation right (ex officio determination) has the right to interview with the principal of the case unless it is contrary to the welfare of the principal of the case. In light of all the circumstances revealed in the arguments of the case, such as the age, parenting situation of the principal of the case, and the degree of contact with the defendant and the principal of the case, determination of the visitation right is reasonable for the emotional stability and welfare of the principal of the case. The plaintiff must actively cooperate with the defendant in the exercise of the visitation right to the principal of the case.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, both the plaintiff and the defendant's claims for divorce against the principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall be accepted for all reasons, and each claim for consolation money against the principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall be dismissed for all reasons without merit. It shall be decided as to the division of property, the person with parental authority over the principal of the case, the custodian, the child support, and the visitation right as above.

Judges

Completion of presiding judge

Judges Yu Young-young

Judges Cho Jae-in

참조조문

-민법 제840조 제6호

참조판례

-대법원 1999. 2. 12. 선고 97므612 판결

유사 판례

-서울가정법원 2014.11.12.선고 2013드합5558 판결

-부산가정법원 2019.10.31.선고 2019드합201665 판결

-부산가정법원 2016.4.21.선고 2015르407 판결

-부산가정법원 2015.9.24.선고 2015드합200381 판결

-부산가정법원 2017.6.29.선고 2016드합201435 판결