2007drid0000 Divorce, etc.

○ ○

2. Address;

Reference domicile

A person shall be appointed.

Last Address

Reference domicile

Sponsor

Address

Reference domicile

May 28, 2008

June 27, 2008

1. The plaintiff and the defendant are divorced.

2. 사건본인의 친권자로 원고를 지정하고, 양육자로 소외 소와 ◆◆◆를 지정한다 .

3. The Plaintiff’s child support from July 2008 to February 2, 2015 to the above Nonparty is paid in 300,000 won per month and 400,000 won per month from March 2015 to April 202.

4. From July 2008 to April 202, 202, the Plaintiff may have an interview with the principal of the case in the residential area of the Plaintiff and the place where the Plaintiff may be responsible from 10:0 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. on the following day.

5. The costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

(1) The plaintiff shall be designated as a person with parental authority and a custodian of the principal of the case.

1. Determination on the claim for divorce

갑 제1 내지 5호증 ( 가지번호 포함 ) 의 각 기재에 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하면, 원고와 피고는 사실혼관계에서 사건본인을 출산한 뒤 2002. 8. 12. 혼인신고를 마친 사실 , 피고는 혼인기간 중 도박과 외박을 자주 하고, 가족들을 부양하지 않는 등 가정에 무관심하다가 2003. 경 집을 나가 행방을 알 수 없게 된 사실, 피고가 집을 나가자 원고 또한 사건본인을 피고의 부모인 소외 소와 ◆◆◆에게 맡겨 놓고 집을 나간 사실을 인정할 수 있다. 위 인정사실에 의하면, 원, 피고의 혼인은 피고의 위와 같은 행위로 더 이상 회복될 수 없을 정도로 파탄되었다고 할 것이고 이는 민법 제840조 제2호 , 제6호에서 규정한 재판상 이혼사유에 해당한다. 따라서 원고의 이 사건 이혼청구는 이유 있다 .

2. Designation of a person with parental authority or custodian;

As seen earlier, the Defendant was in irrelevant to fostering the principal of the case during the marriage period, and it is reasonable to designate the Plaintiff as a person in parental authority for the principal of the case in view of the circumstances where the whereabouts of the Defendant is unknown. However, with respect to the designation of a person in parental authority for the principal of the case, the Plaintiff also did not contact the principal of the case in the early stage after leaving the principal of the case to his grandparents and leaving the house to his grandparents, but he did not contact the principal of the case for about one year prior to his early stage; the principal of the case was mainly raised by his grandparents from the time of his birth to the date of his birth; the principal of the case was formed in close relationship with the above Nonparty; and the educational environment was formed centering on the present residential place; the principal of the case was formed temporarily in order to recover the relationship between the principal of the case and the principal of the case while the lawsuit of this case is pending, it is reasonable to separately designate the person in parental authority for the welfare of the Nonparty and the person in parental authority for the principal of the case.

3. Payment of child support and visitation rights.

(a) Child support;

As long as the Nonparty was designated as the custodian of the principal of this case, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the child support to the Nonparty, who is the custodian of the principal of this case, as the mother of the principal of this case. In full view of the age and educational situation of the principal of this case, Plaintiff’s age, income, and all other circumstances shown in the argument of this case, the Plaintiff was granted child support to the Nonparty after this decision was rendered.

7. From the end of each month, it is reasonable for the principal of this case to pay 300,000 won per month until February 2015, which is the business day for the principal of this case to graduate from an elementary school, and 40,000 won per month from March 3, 2015, which is the business day for the principal of this case to enter a middle school, to April 202. Accordingly, the payment of child support ex officio is ordered pursuant to Articles 843 and 837(4) of the Civil Act.

B. The visitation right plaintiff, as a non-nurt parent of the principal of this case, has the visitation right to the principal of this case. Considering the above various circumstances, it is reasonable to have the visitation right to the principal of this case in the place where the plaintiff's residence and the plaintiff's place of business from 10:0 am on July 2008 to 6:0 am on April 202 and the next day from 2:0 am on April 202.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for divorce of this case is accepted due to the reasons, and it is so decided as per Disposition as to the person with parental authority over the principal of this case, the custodian, the child support, and the visitation right.

Judges Lee Hun-young