logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.10.14 2015가단510387
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 30,000,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from April 30, 2015 to October 14, 2015, and the following.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff completed the marriage report with C in 1993, and had 1 South and North Korea during the marriage life.

The defendant served as a nurse at the hospital operated by C.

B. The Defendant knowingly performed the following acts while teaching C with C, knowing that he/she has a spouse.

1) From May 2014 to April 2015, the Defendant sent C a total of 345 calls or text messages on a total of 345 occasions, and received calls or text messages on a total of 782 occasions from C. 2) The Defendant sent C any message, including “I would like to make a report” several times to C. Kakaox.

(A) 3) The Defendant, along with the vehicle of C, divided obscene dialogues indicating one another’s sexual relationship or similarity relationship (Evidence A 3). 4) The Defendant was accommodated with C in a lodging establishment, such as a hotel, several times.

(A) Nos. 1, 2, and 3. [Evidence 1, 3] / without dispute, each entry in the evidence of subparagraphs 1 through 8, the purport of the whole pleadings [the defendant], and the purport of the whole pleadings (the evidence of No. 3 (Recording) is that the plaintiff installed a black box on a vehicle owned by the defendant and C, and recorded the conversations with two persons without knowledge of the defendant, so it is inadmissible. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the above argument by the defendant. In addition, under the Civil Procedure Act of the Republic of Korea adopting the principle of free evaluation of evidence, the above transcript cannot be deemed inadmissible solely on the ground that the plaintiff recorded a conversation with the other party on the confidential interest of the other party on September 10, 2009 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da37138, 37145, Sept. 10, 2009). 2.

A third party who commits an unlawful act with one side of the married couple, thereby infringing on or impeding the maintenance of common life of the married couple corresponding to the essence of marriage, and doing so.

arrow