logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2020.01.22 2019가단218096
손해배상(기타)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 15,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from April 20, 2019 to January 22, 2020 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 20, 1992, the Plaintiff has two adult children as a legal couple who completed the marriage report with C on February 20, 1992.

B. From November 2017 to October 2018, the Defendant maintained the relationship, such as accepting text messages from time to time, and receiving text messages from time to time.

[Reasons for Recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Evidence No. 7-1 to 3, Evidence No. 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. 1) In principle, a third party’s act of infringing on a couple’s communal life falling under the essence of marriage or interfering with the maintenance thereof and infringing on a spouse’s right as a spouse by committing an unlawful act with the spouse, thereby causing mental pain to the spouse, constitutes a tort (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Meu2441, May 29, 2015). According to the above acknowledged facts, it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant knowingly committed an unlawful act with knowledge that the spouse is a spouse, and that the Plaintiff’s marital relationship was infringed or interfered with the maintenance thereof by the Defendant’s act, and therefore, the Defendant is liable to compensate for mental suffering suffered by the Plaintiff by a tort.

B. In full view of all the circumstances revealed in the arguments in the instant case, including the background and period of the Defendant and C’s wrongful act, the period of marriage and family relationship between the Plaintiff and C, the impact of the Defendant’s improper act on the Plaintiff’s marital life, the Defendant’s attitude after the occurrence of the unlawful act, etc., the consolation money to be paid to the Plaintiff shall be determined as KRW 15 million.

C. In the lawsuit, the Defendant’s lawsuit is reasonable to dispute as to the scope of the Defendant’s performance obligation from April 20, 2019, following the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, as sought by the Plaintiff.

arrow