(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2021.02.18 2020가단5146443

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2021.02.18 2020가단5146443

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 20,000,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from June 26, 2020 to February 18, 2021.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and C from May 21, 2012, were legally married couple who reported marriage on December 24, 2014.

B. The Defendant knew of the fact that C is married to the Plaintiff, and concluded a gender relationship with C on May 13, 2020 and May 20, 2020. On May 27, 2020, the Defendant concluded an inappropriate relationship between C and C with C at the latest and late time on May 27, 2020, with C as he did not have any dispute over a part of the grounds for recognition [the grounds for recognition], the entries in the evidence Nos. 1, 6, and 7, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. The defendant's obligation to compensate for damages

A. The defendant knew that C was the plaintiff's wife, and committed an unlawful act including a sexual intercourse. Such an unlawful act is a tort that infringes on or interferes with the common life of the married couple falling under the essence of the marriage between the plaintiff and the plaintiff's spouse and infringes on the plaintiff's spouse's right as the plaintiff's spouse, and thereby, the defendant should have raised mental pain to the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant should have raised money to the plaintiff.

B. The Plaintiff asserted that C and the Defendant’s wheels began from May 2019, and the Defendant knew that C was a woman only on May 2020, when C were to have been divorced.

The defendant alleged that C was a woman before the second week of May 2020.

Since there is no clear evidence to view during that period, the defendant's patriotism with C cannot be a tort against the plaintiff.

(c)

B. It is reasonable to determine 20,000 won in consideration of all the circumstances, including the health care unit, the content and degree of the Defendant’s misconduct, the period during which the Plaintiff maintained inappropriate relations, and the period of married life of the Plaintiff and C.

3. If so, the defendant's decision is reasonable to resist the scope of the defendant's obligation since June 26, 2020 after the delivery of the complaint of this case to the plaintiff as claimed by the plaintiff as a result of a tort of KRW 20,000 and that of this case.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.04.23 2019가단5199656

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.12.10 2019가단5212368

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.12.10 2020가단5139322

-서울중앙지방법원 2021.04.22 2020가단5251963

-서울북부지방법원 2021.04.13 2020가단135874