2014Dhap201141. Divorce, etc.

2015Dhap20036 (Counterclaims) Divorce, etc.

ParkAA (*************************))

Busan Address

Busan place of service

Busan District Court

Attorney Lee Do-young

J.B (*********** 2**********))

Busan Address

Attorney Lee Do-young

Attorney Lee Jae-soo

September 3, 2015

October 8, 2015

1. The plaintiff (the counterclaim defendant) and the defendant (the counterclaim plaintiff) are divorced by the principal lawsuit and counterclaim.

2. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s claim of consolation money in its principal lawsuit and the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s claim of consolation money in its counterclaim is dismissed.

3. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff) shall pay to the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) 182,00,000 won as division of property and 5% of the annual amount per annum from the day after the day when this judgment became final and conclusive to the day of complete payment.

4. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person.

The principal lawsuit: The defendant (the plaintiff hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") shall pay 50,00,000 won as consolation money to the plaintiff (the counter defendant ; hereinafter referred to as "the plaintiff ") and 20% interest per annum from the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case to the day of the pronouncement of this judgment, and 326,27,005 won as division of property to the day of complete payment, and 5% interest per annum from the day following the day of this judgment to the day of complete payment. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 326,277,05 won as division of property and the amount calculated by the rate of 5% per annum from the day of this judgment to the day of complete payment.

Counterclaim: (1) of this case; (2) The plaintiff shall pay to the defendant 50,00,000 won as consolation money, and 20% interest per annum from the day after the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case to the day of full payment.

1. Determination on the claim for divorce and consolation money against each principal lawsuit and counterclaim

A. Facts of recognition

1) The Plaintiff and the Defendant are married couple who completed the marriage report on December 3, 1973.

2) The Defendant served as an oceangoing seafarer and retired from office around February 2014. From that time, the conflict between the Plaintiff and the Defendant and the Defendant was deepened due to the difference in the method of living, economic problems, etc.

3) The Plaintiff and the Defendant are currently living separately from the beginning of November 2014 to the present time.

[Ground of Recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1, 7, Eul evidence Nos. 2, and institution specializing in protecting older persons in Busan Metropolitan City Dong-gu Busan Metropolitan City

As a result of the inquiry about the case, the purport of the whole pleading

B. Determination

1) A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim for each divorce: A ground under Article 840 subparagraph 6 of the Civil Act exists.

2) Claim for consolation money for each principal lawsuit and counterclaim: None of the grounds therefor.

[Grounds for Determination]

(1) Recognition of the failure of marriage: Various circumstances taken into account, including the fact that the plaintiff and the defendant are living separately for a long time, that both the plaintiff and the defendant want to divorce, and that they seem unlikely to recover trust among themselves and continue their marital life.

(2) The liability for the failure of marriage is both parties.

The Plaintiff cited the Defendant’s disregarding of the Plaintiff, negligence, insult, etc. as grounds for divorce, and the Defendant is suffering from verbal abuse, assault, multi-level, gambling, and corporate debt-related damage, and family withdrawal due to divorce.

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the facts acknowledged earlier and the purport of the entire pleadings, namely, the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s occupation, and the period of birth far far away from the Defendant’s occupation, which led to the deepening of conflict after the Defendant’s retirement, this seems to have occurred. In light of the fact that both spouses make efforts to overcome the above difference in the situation of conflict between husband and wife, and it seems that the conflict has been deepening rather than honing with love and care, the marriage between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is deemed to have occurred due to the fault of both parties, and it is reasonable to deem that the degree of responsibility of both parties is equal.

In addition, the grounds for the remaining failure of the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s assertion are not sufficient to acknowledge the fact that only the evidence submitted to this court is generated, or it is difficult to deem that the cause of marriage dissolution itself was the cause of marriage dissolution, and thus, it is not acceptable to accept the grounds for divorce of

C. Sub-determination

Therefore, the plaintiff and the defendant are divorced by the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim, but all of the principal lawsuit and the counterclaims are not acceptable.

2. Determination on the claim for division of property in the principal lawsuit

A. Details about the formation of the property;

1) The Plaintiff continued to work as an ocean-going seafarer during the marriage period, except for the Plaintiff’s work at a lending company, etc. from around 1998 to around 2007, and retired on February 2, 2014.

2) The Defendant was in exclusive charge of household affairs and child care during the marriage period, while working in restaurants, factories, etc.

3) The Plaintiff and the Defendant living as above, while living together with their income, formed property such as the entry in the separate sheet of asset size as well as the acquisition of * in Busan in the name of skin** in the Gu** in the Gu*** in the Dong******* in the **** in the above *** in the separate sheet of asset size.

(b) Property and value to be divided;

1) Property subject to division: Property actually formed or maintained by the Plaintiff and the Defendant with the labor force during the marriage, and is subject to division of property due to the difference between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s common property, when comprehensively considering the circumstances revealed in the pleadings, such as the developments leading up to the formation of the property as seen earlier, the developments leading up to the acquisition of the pertinent property, and the degree of income and living expenses during the marriage of the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

2) The value of the property to be divided;

A) Plaintiff’s net property: 2,793,532 won

B) Defendant’s net property: 367, 314, 931 won

C) Total amount of the net property of the original and the Defendant: 370, 108, 463 won

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 3, 4, 14, 17, 19, 25, 27, 28, and 4, Eul evidence Nos. 4, AIA life insurance, Samsung Fire and Marine Insurance, Eastern Fire and Eastern Fire, Busan Bank, SC Bank, and Nonghyup Bank, the whole purport of the arguments, as a result of the response of each order to submit financial transaction information to Gap, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

C. Determination as to the party’s assertion on the property subject to subdivision

In the attached Form 1 List of Property Specifications and the annexed Form 2, each of the parties' arguments and judgments shall be as shown in the column.

(d) Ratio and method of division of property;

1) Division ratio of property: Plaintiff 50%, Defendant 50%

[Ground of determination] The Plaintiff and the Defendant’s contribution to the formation and maintenance of the property subject to division as seen above are the fact that the Defendant was in exclusive charge of household affairs and childcare so that the Plaintiff may be able to concentrate on the workplace life. Other circumstances shown in the argument in the instant case, such as the process, period and failure of marital life, the age of the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the age of the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and the future income activities of the Plaintiff and the Defendant

2) The method of division of property: considering the name and form of the property to be divided, the grounds for acquisition and use of the property, the convenience of division, etc., the Defendant’s payment to the Plaintiff of the shortage of the amount to be reverted to the Plaintiff according to the above division ratio.

3) Property division amount to be paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiff: KRW 182,00,000

【Calculation Form】

① The Plaintiff’s share according to the division rate of property among the Plaintiff and Defendant’s net property

Total net property 370, 108, 463 won x 50% = 185,054, 231 won (turf less than won)

(2) Amount under paragraph (1) after deducting the Plaintiff’s net property.

185, 054, 231 - 2, 793, 532 won = 182, 260, 699 won

[3] Division of property that the Defendant pays to the Plaintiff

② The amount set forth in the above paragraph 182,00,000 won less than the amount set forth in the above paragraph

E. Sub-determination

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 182,00,000 won as division of property and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act from the day following the conclusion of this judgment to the day of full payment.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the claim for divorce between the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim shall be accepted on the grounds of their reasoning, and the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim shall be dismissed on the grounds of their merit. The claim for division of property in the principal lawsuit shall be determined as above. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Do-constition

Judges Kim Jin-jin

Judges Park Jong-hee