Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) (Attorney Song Dong-dong et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Defendant-Counterclaim (Law Firm Barun Law, Attorneys Han-sung et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellee)

May 28, 2009

Gwangju District Court Decision 2007Ddan4986 decided August 14, 2008 (main office), 2008Ddan1427 (Counterclaim) decided August 14, 2008

1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff.

1. Purport of claim

The principal lawsuit: The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant; hereinafter "the plaintiff") and the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff; hereinafter "the defendant") are divorced. The defendant shall pay 30,00,000 won as consolation money to the plaintiff with 5% interest per annum from the day following the delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case to the day of the first judgment, and 20% interest per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 28,597,040 won for the registration of transfer of ownership based on the division of property with respect to real estate stated in the separate sheet to the day of complete payment.

Counterclaim: The plaintiff shall be divorced from the defendant. The plaintiff shall pay 30,000,000 won as consolation money and 20% interest per annum to the day of complete payment from the day following the judgment of the court of first instance.

2. Purport of appeal

The part against the defendant regarding the claim for consolation money and division of property among the part concerning the principal lawsuit of the judgment of the first instance, shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim for principal lawsuit corresponding to the revoked part shall be dismissed (the defendant did not appeal against the counterclaim of the judgment of the first instance)

The reasoning of the court's reasoning concerning this case is as follows: (a) during the first instance court's 6th and 7th court's 6th 6th e.g., "In addition, the defendant's 10,353,182 out of the amount that the defendant received as an honorary retirement allowance is compensation for the voluntary retirement, and the remaining amount of the voluntary retirement consolation benefits, other than 10,353,182 won, are not paid as compensation for the defendant's work, and thus it cannot be viewed that the plaintiff's contribution to the voluntary retirement allowance should be excluded from the property subject to division; (b) however, the above voluntary retirement consolation benefits, etc. have the nature of the compensation for work in addition to the nature as compensation for the voluntary retirement, and as long as it is reasonable to deem that the defendant contributed to the work in the Red Council until the voluntary retirement, the above argument is also included in the property subject to division, and therefore, it is without merit as stated in the reasoning of the first instance court's judgment.

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

[Attachment]

Judges Kim Byung-su (Presiding Justice) (Presiding Justice)