logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.09.26 2017가단102327
손해배상
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s 5% per annum from January 13, 2017 to September 26, 2017.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff and C are legally married couple who completed the marriage report on July 26, 2003, and have two children under the chain.

B. The Defendant knew that he/she had a spouse from May 25, 2016 to May 2017, sent to C with a cellular phone, etc. from time to time, and had a sexual relationship.

C. Around July 2016, the Plaintiff stated to the effect that the Plaintiff’s phone calls to the Defendant and calls to the Defendant, but even thereafter, the Defendant continued to contact with C at any time and continued to contact with C.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including branch numbers for those with branch numbers) and purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. If one side of a couple’s liability for damages commits a tort against a third party and a third party’s duty of sexual good faith that should not be committed, it shall be a cause of judicial divorce pursuant to Article 840 of the Civil Act and shall be liable to compensate for mental suffering suffered by the spouse due to such cause.

Furthermore, a third party should not interfere with a married couple’s community life, which is the essence of the marriage, by intervening in a couple’s community life of another person and causing the failure of the couple’s community life.

In addition, if a third party commits an act of infringing on a marital life falling under the essence of marriage or interfering with the maintenance thereof, and infringing on the rights of the spouse as the spouse, and thereby causing mental pain to the spouse, it constitutes a tort.

The "Cheating" here includes a broad concept, including the adultery, which does not reach the gap, but includes all fraudulent acts that are not faithful to the husband's sexual duty of good faith.

In this case, according to the above facts, the defendant knows that C has a spouse, has a teaching system with C for a considerable period of time, and has a sexual relationship from time to time.

arrow