logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.07.16 2019가단5292814
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 20,000,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from December 20, 2019 to July 16, 2020, and the following.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 7, 2012, the Plaintiff and C have two minor children under the chain, who are married couple who reported their marriage on March 7, 2012

B. The Defendant, despite being aware that C had a legal spouse, committed an unlawful act with C, such as having a sexual relationship several times in the studio, etc. located in the city where C leased from September 2019, and having a sexual relationship with C, and seeking the Defendant’s thickness against marriage.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, Eul's 3 and 4 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. 1) Husband and wife has a duty to comprehensively cooperate with each other in order to maintain marriage as a married life through mutual cooperation and protection as a community which is a mental, physical, and economic combination. As such, husband and wife has a right to such duty to live together or maintain a common life of the married couple, which shall not engage in any unlawful act. As a matter of course, a third party shall not interfere with a couple’s common life falling under the essence of marriage, such as interference in a couple’s common life, thereby causing failure in the marital life. A third party’s act of infringing on or interfering with a couple’s common life falling under the essence of marriage and infringing on a spouse’s right as a spouse, thereby infringing on the spouse’s right as such, constitutes a tort (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 2011Meu297, Nov. 20, 2014). The Defendant was aware that C was well aware that it had a spouse, and the Defendant was aware that it was in bad faith with C and caused a serious mental suffering of the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff mental suffering from the above tort to the plaintiff in money.

B. The Defendant’s scope of damages is the Plaintiff.

arrow