2016u561 (principal office) Divorce

2016Reu60 (Counterclaim) Divorce and consolation money

A

B

Daegu Family Court Decision 2015Ra15513 decided April 20, 2016

December 8, 2016

January 26, 2017

1. All the appeal filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and the counterclaim claim filed in the trial are dismissed. 2. The costs of appeal and the costs of lawsuit incurred by the counterclaim are borne by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

1. Purport of claim

A. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant, hereinafter referred to as "the plaintiff") and the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff, hereinafter referred to as "the defendant") are divorced.

B. The plaintiff and the defendant shall be divorced. The plaintiff shall pay to the defendant 5,00,000 won consolation money and the amount calculated by the ratio of 5% per annum from the day following the delivery of a copy of the counterclaim of this case to the sentencing day of this case and 15% per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment (the defendant filed a counterclaim at the trial).

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

1. Judgment on the legitimacy of the subsequent appeal

According to the records, the court of first instance shall serve a copy of the complaint against the defendant, a writ of summons of the date for pleading, etc. by public notice, and shall proceed with pleadings on April 20, 2016, and sentence the judgment in favor of the plaintiff on the plaintiff on April 20, 2016, and serve the original copy thereof to the defendant by public notice. The defendant may recognize the fact that he/she filed an appeal after the subsequent completion of the case on August 11, 2016, because he/she becomes aware of the above fact immediately after August 1

According to the above facts, the defendant was unable to observe the period of appeal, which is a peremptory term, because he was unaware of the progress and result of the lawsuit in this case due to a cause not attributable to himself. Thus, the appeal filed by the defendant within two weeks from the date on which he became aware of the fact that the judgment of the court of first instance was pronounced, is lawful and lawful.

2. Determination on the claim for divorce and counterclaim consolation money, respectively, against the principal lawsuit and counterclaim

(a) Facts of recognition;

1) The Plaintiff and the Defendant, via the marriage broker, concluded the marriage report on November 2014 at Vietnam on December 15, 2014 and completed the marriage report on April 20, 2015.

2) On September 3, 2015, the Defendant entered Korea and began married life with two children between the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff’s mother, and the Plaintiff’s former wife.

3) The Defendant went out on October 23, 2015, and the Plaintiff and the Defendant were living separately from that time until that time.

4) The Plaintiff and the Defendant have sought each divorce as the principal lawsuit and counterclaim of this case.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including each number, if any) and the purport of the whole pleading

B. Determination

1) A claim for divorce of principal lawsuit: there are reasons under subparagraphs 2 and 6 of Article 840 of the Civil Act.

2) Counterclaim divorce or claim of consolation money: None of the grounds therefor

[Ground for determination] In full view of all the circumstances revealed in the pleadings, including the fact that the Plaintiff and the Defendant have been living separately for a long period from October 23, 2015 to the present, and that both the Plaintiff and the Defendant have filed a claim for divorce by filing a principal lawsuit and counterclaim, it is recognized that the marriage between the Plaintiff and the Defendant has ceased to exist to the extent that it is no longer recoverable.

Furthermore, according to the above recognition, the reason for the failure of the marriage is not settled by trust and dialogue, and it is judged that the defendant is more responsible for the failure of the marriage.

In regard to this, the defendant asserts that the marital relationship was broken down due to the plaintiff's reason attributable to which the plaintiff's mother did not understand the defendant's wife even though the plaintiff's mother did not interfere with and bullying the defendant during the marital life, but did not have any evidence to acknowledge it.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for divorce against the principal lawsuit shall be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and the judgment of the first instance is just, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit, and the defendant's claim for counterclaim divorce and consolation money raised in the trial is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

The presiding judge, the Korean Judge;

Judges Jeon Jae-hwan

Judges Lee Jong-soo