(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.05.24 2016가단5292783

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.05.24 2016가단5292783

위자료

Text

1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 20,000,000 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from December 24, 2016 to May 24, 2017.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff completed the marriage report on August 14, 2013 with C and C.

B. The Defendant was a person who served in the same workplace as the Plaintiff and C, and committed an unlawful act by teaching C during several months in around 2014.

C. On December 24, 2014, the Defendant made a telephone call to C. From January 2015 to February 2015, the Defendant sent contact to C using the Kakakaox.

[Grounds for recognition] The respective descriptions or images of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 9, and 15, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination and conclusion by a third party who committed an unlawful act with a spouse, thereby infringing on a couple's community life falling under the essence of marriage or interfering with the maintenance thereof and infringing on the spouse's right as the spouse, in principle, constitutes a tort. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is a person working at the same workplace as the plaintiff and C, who has committed an unlawful act while teaching with C even though he knows that the plaintiff and C were legally married, and it is apparent that the plaintiff suffered considerable mental suffering due to the violation of a couple's community life due to the defendant and C's unlawful act, and therefore, the defendant is obliged to pay consolation money according to his mental damage to the plaintiff.

Furthermore, regarding the amount of consolation money, the amount of consolation money shall be determined at KRW 20 million, considering all the circumstances shown in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the following: (a) the Plaintiff and C’s age, the period of marriage continuance between the Plaintiff and C, and the content and period of the Defendant and C’s fraudulent act (the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant and C continued the fraudulent act from August 2013 to February 2015; however, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone cannot be deemed to have continued the fraudulent act from August 2015 to February 2015, as the Plaintiff asserted, as the Plaintiff asserted). In light of the influence of the foregoing fraudulent act on the relationship between the Plaintiff and C, it is reasonable to determine the amount of consolation money as KRW

Therefore, the defendant paid consolation money to the plaintiff 20 million won.

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2017.05.16 2016가단260497

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.05.23 2016가단5203479

-청주지방법원 2020.08.13 2020가단22711

-서울동부지방법원 2018.04.11 2017가단114222

-서울남부지방법원 2017.10.17 2016가단210041