2017dridum 9738 Divorce and Condolence Money, etc.

A (1988.00000)

Address

Reference domicile

(B) B. (1988 no. 198)

Address

Reference domicile

1. A;

2. B

The principal of the case is the same as each defendant in the domicile and original domicile.

January 12, 2018

February 2, 2018

1. The plaintiff and the defendant are divorced.

2. The defendant shall pay consolation money of KRW 20 million to the plaintiff.

3. Each plaintiff shall be designated as a person with parental authority and a custodian of the principal of the case.

4. From February 28, 2018, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 50,000 per month for each principal of the instant case from February 28, 2018 to the day before the principal of the instant case becomes adult.

5. The defendant may visitation the principal of the case as follows:

(a) Date: Second month, fourth Sundays: from 10 A.M. to 4 P.M.; and

B. Method: The defendant takes the principal of the case into his residence, and freely negotiates at a place where the defendant may be responsible, and then takes the case into his residence again.

C. The above visitation right should proceed with with the welfare of the principal of the case as the top priority. If a change of the situation occurs, and the above adjustment ratio is required, the defendant may enter into contact with each other at least three days before the change of the situation and change it under consultation.

D. The plaintiff shall actively cooperate with the defendant and the principal of the case in the visitation right, and shall not interfere with this.

5. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

6. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

7. Paragraphs 2 and 4 can be provisionally executed.

The judgment of the court below and the defendant under paragraphs (1) and (3) of this Article shall pay the plaintiff a solatium of KRW 50 million. The defendant shall pay the plaintiff a solatium of KRW 1,00,000 per month as the child support of the principal of this case.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant are legally married couple who reported the marriage in 2013, and have the principal of the case under the chain.

B. During the marriage period, the Defendant borrowed money from the Plaintiff’s private financial right to borrow money to gambling habitually, and the Plaintiff recommended medical treatment in relation to gambling, but the Defendant did not comply therewith.

C. In order to raise the gambling fund, the Defendant brought the case principal's stone paper and balm from the Plaintiff's land office in the Plaintiff's land office, and withdrawn the money by deducting the card in the Plaintiff's land office from the Plaintiff's land office.

D. The Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for a crime of fraud among the transactions on the Internet’s middle and high-speed trading site, and was arrested again while living together with the Plaintiff on the day of around 2017.

C. At present, the Plaintiff alone raises the principal of the case.

D. Although the Defendant was directly served with the instant complaint, he did not submit a written answer and did not appear on the date of pleading at the time of the closing of the instant complaint.

[Grounds for Recognition: Evidence Nos. 1 through 8 (including each number), the purport of the entire pleadings]

2. Determination as to the claim of divorce and the claim of consolation money

According to the above facts of recognition, it is reasonable to view that the marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant has been broken down to the extent that it is impossible to recover due to the reasons attributable to the defendant, such as abandonment to the plaintiff and the principal of the case, etc. This constitutes grounds for judicial divorce under subparagraphs 2 and 6 of Article 840 of the Civil Act.

Since it is apparent in light of the empirical rule that the plaintiff suffered from mental pain due to the failure of marriage due to the defendant's mistake above, the defendant is obligated to pay it in money. Considering all circumstances such as the plaintiff and the defendant's age, the period of marriage, the circumstances surrounding the marriage dissolution, etc., it is reasonable to determine the amount of consolation money that the defendant should pay to the plaintiff as KRW 20 million.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay 20 million won to the plaintiff as consolation money.

3. Determination as to the designation of a person with parental authority and a custodian, a claim for child support, and visitation right (ex officio)

A. Part of a claim for designation of a person with parental authority and a custodian

Considering the source and circumstance of the marriage and failure of the defendant, the age and circumstances of the principal of the case, the family environment, and the fact that the plaintiff is bringing up the principal of the case, etc., it is reasonable to allow the plaintiff to exercise parental authority and custody over the principal of the case for the smooth growth and welfare of the principal of the case. Thus, the plaintiff shall be designated as a person with parental authority and the custodian of the principal of the case.

B. Part of claim for child support

As a father of the case principal, the defendant is obligated to pay the future child support to the plaintiff as a result of the fact that he is responsible for bringing up the case principal together with the plaintiff.

Considering the age, career, economic ability, asset status of the principal of this case, the age and status of custody of the principal of this case, family environment, equity in the burden of child support, and other circumstances, the Defendant shall be determined to pay 50,000 won per person of the principal of this case to the Plaintiff on the last day of each month as child support from February 28, 2018 to the day before the principal of this case becomes the adult.

C. Determination on visitation right (ex officio determination)

As long as the Plaintiff was designated as the custodian of the principal of this case, the Defendant, a non-nicker, has the right to interview the principal of this case. In full view of all the circumstances, including the Plaintiff, the Defendant’s intent, the age and significance of the principal of this case, the health status, and the current situation of custody, etc., as shown in the argument of this case, determining the method of interview is reasonable for the emotional stability and welfare of the principal of this case as described in Paragraph 5 of the Disposition.

4. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's claim for divorce of this case is justified, and the claim for consolation money is accepted within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition with regard to the designation of the person with parental authority, the person with parental authority, the person with custody, the claim for child support, and the visitation right (ex officio).

Judges Kim Jong-soo