beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 20,000,000 as well as the annual rate of KRW 5% from June 15, 2017 to December 6, 2017 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Evidence No. 1 through 3, A4-1, 2, A5 through A12, and the purport of the whole pleadings
A. On June 2, 2011, the Plaintiff completed the report of marriage with C on June 2, 201, and between the two children, who are five years of age and those under three years of age.
B. 1) Around November 2016, the Plaintiff discovered a platform with C’s knick phone, where he had a knick, and he had an string mobile phone. There was a conversation that exchanged the Defendant and Kakakakaox on the cell phone’s dialogue list. The Plaintiff asked C to the mobile phone, and the Plaintiff stated to the effect that “The fact is a company’s cellular phone with the head of the U.S., the knick phone, the wind, the wind, and the Kakakao Stockholm account was created by personal information in the company.” 2) A got golf around the end of November 2016, and the Plaintiff did not receive a telephone even.
C The punishment is that we want to enter the port, but they did not enter the port.
As the plaintiff called C's punishment, C's punishment was drinking as it was, but he asked at the middle.
In several hours, C sent to the Plaintiff a message to the effect that “I drinked a high school-friendly drinking, I am locked at her native house, and I am Kakao Stockholm because they were too unfolded.”
3) On December 12, 2016, the Plaintiff sought information on the Defendant’s phone number, including the Defendant’s Facebook, and confirmed that the Defendant’s pictures were affixed from the same day as C in the Defendant’s Facebook, and determined that C was “I am going to a golf course with the Defendant’s golf, and I am to a golf course.” However, C was denied that “I am going to a golf course with the Defendant’s loan, and I am to a golf course.” However, C was not “I am to a scam, not a scam,” and the contact was not well known. 4) On December 12, 2016, the Plaintiff applied the same pictures as the Defendant’s Kakakaopropy photograph as the Plaintiff’s Kakaopropy photograph as the Plaintiff’s propy photograph.