In the case of serious insult and abuse which are unable to live together by the couple who falls under the grounds for judicial divorce;

Of the Plaintiff’s medical malpractice, the Defendant’s act of going out and staying outside without nursing and taking a bath to cause mental pain to the Plaintiff, etc. constitutes a serious insult and abuse that the couple is unable to live together, which constitutes a cause for judicial divorce under the former Civil Act, and the so-called “the Defendant’s act” can not justify the Defendant’s act without disclosing what kind of deviation was connected to the Plaintiff’s act, if there is a cause for the Defendant’s act of deviation.

Article 840 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff

Defendant

Seoul High Court Decision 4292 civilian 60 delivered on August 26, 1960, Seoul High Court Decision 4292Da 60 delivered on August 26, 1960

We reverse the original judgment.

The case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal by the plaintiff's attorney are examined.

The judgment below rejected the plaintiff's claim for divorce, which is the reason why the defendant did not know the plaintiff's whereabouts while the plaintiff was in contact with the defendant, and other persons who did not know the plaintiff's whereabouts. It is argued that Gap's testimony No. 2 was consistent with this, but the defendant's testimony of Lee Jong-young's witness at the court of first instance could not be believed in its entirety, and it is hard to find that the plaintiff's act of breaking out the plaintiff's desire to escape from the plaintiff's judgment, and that the plaintiff's mental harm was no more than that of the plaintiff's mental harm because the plaintiff's act of breaking out the plaintiff's desire to escape from the plaintiff's judgment, and that the court below's act of breaking out the plaintiff's mental harm cannot be seen as a serious reason to acknowledge that the plaintiff's act of breaking out the plaintiff's desire to get a divorce. However, the court below's act of breaking out the plaintiff's mental harm as the plaintiff's defendant did not have any other reasons.

Supreme Court Judge Lee Young-chul(Presiding Judge) (Presiding Justice)