2014D 11389 Divorce, etc.

KimA

ParkB

February 4, 2015

March 4, 2015

1. The plaintiff and the defendant are divorced.

2. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 10 million won as consolation money and 5% per annum from September 17, 2014 to March 4, 2015, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

3. The plaintiff's remaining claim for consolation money is dismissed.

4. Property division:

A. The defendant implements the registration procedure for transfer of ownership on the real estate stated in the attached list to the plaintiff for division of property based on the fixed date of this judgment.

B. The Plaintiff assumes the obligation indicated in the separate sheet from the Defendant as a discharge, and the Plaintiff bears the duty to pay the obligation as indicated in the separate sheet on behalf of the Defendant, if it is impossible to discharge the obligation with exemption from liability.

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

6. Paragraph 2 can be provisionally executed.

The disposition No. 1 and the defendant pay to the plaintiff 20 million won as consolation money, 20 million won as well as 20% interest per annum from the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case to the day of complete payment, and with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet as the division of property (hereinafter referred to as "multi-household house of this case"), the registration procedure for transfer of ownership based on the division of property based on the date of confirmation of the judgment will be implemented.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant were legally married couple who lived from around April 2007 and reported marriage on November 20, 2013.

B. The Plaintiff granted monthly pay and allowances to the Defendant as the crew members of the domestic vessel who are in charge of the domestic vessel, and kept a record thereof. The Defendant is the full-time employee who is in charge of the domestic affairs.

C. On May 24, 2010, the Plaintiff and the Defendant purchased the instant multi-household housing in which the Plaintiff and the Defendant purchased the money, etc. that the Plaintiff and the Defendant shared as collateral and offered as collateral, and completed the transfer of ownership on May 24, 2010.

D. On April 2013, the Defendant, from the date of full payment of all the above secured loans, went out of the existing confirmed life, and neglected to do so, and neglected to do so, as well as deposit KRW 50,000,000,000, which was deposited in agricultural cooperatives, was used for entertainment expenses and gambling. In addition, the Defendant’s recovery of KRW 20,000,000,000 from among them, was used for entertainment expenses and gambling.

E. After that, the Plaintiff, who became aware of such fact, was responsible for the Defendant, and on March 3, 2014, the Defendant returned to the Plaintiff the remaining KRW 35 million out of the said money, and went back to the house.

F. On April 2, 2014, the Defendant obtained loans of KRW 50,000,000 from Soyang Savings Cooperatives (hereinafter “the instant loans”) as collateral for the instant multi-household housing, and thereafter, remains missing until now.

G. The Plaintiff wishes to acquire the instant loan obligation through division of property through the instant lawsuit and to acquire the ownership of the instant multi-household house from the Defendant at the same time.

[Grounds for recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the claim for divorce and consolation money

According to the above facts of recognition, the marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant was no longer able to recover, and the main liability for the failure of the marriage was the failure of the marriage due to the death and gambling, and the family life was set up by themselves.

The plaintiff's claim for divorce of this case is justified because it constitutes grounds for divorce by re-market as stipulated in Article 840, Article 840, Article 840, 3, and 6 of the Civil Code.

Furthermore, in light of the empirical rule, it is apparent that the plaintiff suffered a considerable mental suffering due to the failure of the plaintiff and the defendant's marriage due to the defendant's wrong fault, and therefore, the defendant has no intent to go against it, and the amount of consolation money is determined as KRW 10 million in full view of various circumstances, such as the period of marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant, the process and degree of responsibility of the marriage dissolution, the plaintiff's height and the defendant's property status.

Therefore, the Plaintiff and the Defendant are divorced, and the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the consolation money of KRW 10 million and the Defendant to the Defendant for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum prescribed by the Civil Act from September 17, 2014 to March 4, 2015, which is the day following the date of the instant judgment, until March 4, 2015, which is the day of the instant judgment, and 20% per annum prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion of Legal Proceedings, etc. from the following day to the day of the full payment. Determination on the claim for division of property on March 3, 200

(a) Property and value to be divided;

(1) The plaintiff's active and passive properties

(A) Pro rata property: Cash 30 million won

(B) No small property:

(2) The defendant's active and passive properties

(A) Pro rata property: 127,046,623 won

1) Multi-household housing in this case: 15 million won

2) Cash 22,046,623 won

(B) No small property:

(3) Total net property of the Plaintiff and the Defendant: 162,046,623 won ( = 35 million + 127,046, 623 won)

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 4, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, and the purport of the whole pleadings

(b) Ratio and method of division of property;

(1) Division ratio: Plaintiff 65%, Defendant 35%

Considering the circumstances revealed in the arguments in the instant case, such as the process and period of the acquisition of the property subject to division, the process and failure of marriage life, and the background leading up to the failure, the age, occupation, income, and livelihood of the Plaintiff and the Defendant, it is reasonable to determine the division ratio of property in the instant case.

(2) Method of division of property

In light of the Plaintiff’s intention, the market value of the property subject to subdivision, etc., the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer for the instant multi-family housing, and the Plaintiff is exempted from the obligation indicated in the attached list with which the instant multi-family housing is offered as security, and the other property is to vest in the name of each party.

C. Sub-committee

Therefore, as a division of property, ① the Defendant implements the registration procedure for transfer of ownership based on the division of property for the instant multi-household housing on the date this judgment became final and conclusive, ② the Plaintiff is exempted from the obligation indicated in the separate sheet from the Defendant. If it is impossible to assume the obligation with exemption, the Plaintiff bears the obligation to pay the obligation indicated in the separate sheet on behalf of the Defendant.

4. Conclusion

If so, the plaintiff's claim for divorce is justified, and the claim for consolation money is accepted within the extent of the above recognition, and the remaining claim for consolation money is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Lee Jae-chul