logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 군산지원 2018.12.11 2018가단54772
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 15,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from August 17, 2018 to December 11, 2018 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

Facts of recognition

The plaintiff and C are legally married couple who completed the marriage report on October 11, 1994, and have two children among them.

After September 2017, the Defendant received messages such as “A”, “D”, “B”, “B”, and “B”, and “C” from the Plaintiff, and around that time, received the Plaintiff’s demand to “C and private contact with the Plaintiff,” but sent the messages to the Masan located in the military.

[Ground of recognition] Each description and image of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, and the purport of the entire pleadings, the occurrence of damages liability for determining the cause of a claim, and the couple are obliged to live together and support each other and cooperate with each other (Article 826 of the Civil Act). Husband and wife are obliged to cooperate and protect each other as a community combining mental, physical, and economicly combined with each other to maintain marriage as a marital community, and have the right to cooperate comprehensively among them.

As a matter of such duty of living together or the duty of maintaining marital life, married couple shall not engage in any unlawful act, and they shall bear the sexual duty of care.

Accordingly, if one side of the married couple commits an unlawful act, it becomes a ground for judicial divorce pursuant to Article 840 of the Civil Code, and one of the married couple is liable for damages caused by a tort against mental suffering that the spouse suffered.

On the other hand, a third party shall not interfere with a marital life falling under the essence of the marriage by intervening in a marital life of another person and causing a failure of the marital life. A third party's act of infringing on the marital life falling under the essence of marriage or interfering with the maintenance thereof and infringing on the spouse's right to it, in principle, constitutes tort.

Supreme Court Decision 200 delivered on May 13, 2005

arrow