(영문) 부산가정법원 2019.10.23.선고 2019르20065 판결

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant ordering payment in excess of the amount ordered under the following Paragraph 2 shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part shall be dismissed.

2. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff 5 million won with 5% interest per annum from May 31, 2018 to October 23, 2019, and 15% interest per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment.

3. The defendant's remaining appeal is dismissed.

4. 3/4 of the total costs of litigation shall be borne by the Plaintiff, and the remainder by the Defendant, respectively.

Purport of claim and appeal

1. Purport of claim

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 50 million, and he shall pay to the plaintiff full payment from the day after the delivery of the complaint of this case.

By the day, 15% interest per annum shall be paid.

2. Purport of appeal

The part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to that part shall be dismissed.

of this section.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and Byung reported marriage on November 16, 2007, and two children among them are minors.

(b) Byung conducted around January 2018 ○ Dong-dong activities and sent to the Defendant, a member of the same club, the Defendant was close to that of the same club.

C. C. C. C. Around that time, C. C. was frequently going out of the country, late home, and gambling, etc. A. D. A. B. A. B. B. B. B. B. B. the Defendant’s main possession of the delivery site in the Internet shopping.

D. Accordingly, when the plaintiff examined the behavior of the defendant and Byung in the apartment of the defendant's apartment of the defendant's domicile almost every day, the defendant frequently observed the situation that the defendant started along with the defendant's apartment of the defendant, and in particular, Byung's her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her and her her her her her hers her

E. On May 9, 2018, Byung called 'C' to 'C' and 'C' to 'C' to 'C' to 'C' and 'C' to 'C' to purchase the defendant's character, relationship, and Domins.

A punishment relation between the Defendant and the Defendant is a third party, and a third party, who is a female member, was given a detailed talk about the operation of △△△△△△△△△△ (the Defendant also recognized the fact that the mother purchased △△, or that the Defendant was a male and female member of the ▽△△△△△△△△△).

F. On April 26, 2018, the Plaintiff brought a lawsuit of divorce, etc. against Byung, while filing the instant lawsuit against the Defendant on May 21, 2018.

G. In the above divorce lawsuit, conciliation was concluded between the Plaintiff and Byung on September 13, 2018, “The parental authority and the right to foster children shall be borne by the Plaintiff, and the child support shall be borne by the Plaintiff, and the compensation for consolation money and the division of property shall not be made.”

【Ground of recognition】 Each entry of Gap evidence 1 through 14 (including branch numbers for those with numbers), the purport of the whole pleading, and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Determination:

(a) Occurrence of liability for damages;

1) A third party shall not interfere with a married couple’s community life falling under the essence of marriage by interfering with a married couple’s community life by causing a failure of the married couple’s community life by participating in a couple’s community life. A third party’s act infringing on, or interfering with, a couple’s community life falling under the essence of marriage by committing an unlawful act with the married couple, and infringing on his/her spouse’s rights as the spouse, thereby causing mental distress to the spouse, constitutes tort in principle (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Meu2997, Nov. 20, 201). “Cheating” in this case is a broad concept that includes adultery, but does not reach the gap, all unlawful acts that do not fulfill the duty of good faith of the married couple may be included, and whether an unlawful act is an unlawful act, shall be assessed in consideration of the degree and circumstances thereof depending on specific cases (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 8Meu87, May 24, 198; 8Meu16, Dec. 16, 1996).

2) As acknowledged earlier, in full view of the following facts: (a) Defendant was aware of sick at the ○○ Dong branch of the Defendant around January 2018, and (b) Defendant was recognized as having a kind of relationship to the extent of receiving goods purchased on the Internet instead of the goods purchased on the Internet; (c) Defendant and Byung went to work almost every day in the apartment site at the Defendant’s domicile; and (d) Defendant and Byung went to work naturally, such as her son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s her son’s son’s son’s son, and her son’s son’s son’s son’s son.

3) As to this, the Defendant asserts that there was no liability for damages since the Plaintiff and Byung’s marital relationship had already been in the state of failure due to the Plaintiff’s violent act, misconduct, etc. However, the evidence submitted by the Defendant alone is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff and Byung’s marital relationship had been in the state of failure to recover objectively, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise. Therefore, the Defendant’s above assertion is without merit.

B. Scope of liability for damages

The facts acknowledged earlier are as follows, taking into account the following circumstances, such as evidence Nos. 1 and 6-1 through 18 of evidence Nos. 6 and the overall purport of images and arguments, namely, the circumstance and period leading to the unlawful act by the defendant and Byung, the form and degree of such unlawful act, the marriage period of the plaintiff and Byung, the original high-priced patient's horse to Byung on December 2, 2017, and the Plaintiff appears to have been in a marital relationship between the Plaintiff and Byung, and the fact that the Plaintiff also appears to have committed an unlawful act (c). The evidence submitted by the Defendant alone does not specify the time when the Plaintiff committed an unlawful act at which the Plaintiff would pay consolation money to the Plaintiff as KRW 5 million.

C. Sub-committee

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay damages for delay calculated by the rate of 5% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from May 31, 2018 to October 23, 2019, where it is reasonable to dispute over whether the defendant exists with respect to the existence of the obligation and the scope of the obligation from May 31, 2018, the day after the written complaint of this case was served to the defendant, as compensation for delay, to the plaintiff.

3. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted within the extent of the above recognition, and the remaining claims shall be dismissed as they are not reasonable. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with some different conclusions, the part against the defendant who ordered payment in excess of the above recognition amount among the judgment of the court of first instance which accepted part of the appeal by the defendant, and dismissed the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part, and the defendant's appeal against Bals of money is dismissed as it has