(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.07.18 2017가단113948 (1)

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) 창원지방법원 2018.07.18 2017가단113948 (1)

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 15,00,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from September 15, 2017 to July 18, 2018.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a legally married couple who completed the marriage report on November 11, 2002.

B. The Defendant committed an unlawful act, such as entering into a sexual relationship with C with C, and making text messages and telephone calls, with knowledge that C has a spouse by marriage.

C. In the course of dialogue with the Plaintiff by Kakakao, the Defendant, in response to the Plaintiff’s assertion to commit an unlawful act with C, was minated and personal attacked.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2-1, Eul evidence 2-1, Gap evidence 3-1, Gap evidence 5-1 to Gap evidence 7-30, Gap evidence 10-10, witness Eul's testimony and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

(a) An act of a third party which causes mental pain to the spouse by infringing on a marital life falling under the essence of marriage or interfering with its maintenance, and infringing on the spouse's right as the spouse, shall constitute a tort;

As seen earlier, it constitutes a tort against the Plaintiff that the Defendant, while having a dial relationship with C and resisting the Plaintiff, intended to take a bath and personal attack, constitutes a tort against the Plaintiff. As such, the Defendant is obligated to have the Plaintiff suffered emotional distress.

In regard to this, the Defendant asserts to the effect that since the marital life of the Plaintiff and C had been de facto distress before the act with C was committed, tort liability against the Plaintiff is not established. However, it is insufficient to recognize that only the descriptions or images of the evidence Nos. 1 through 5 are sufficient to recognize that the marital life of the Plaintiff and C had already been in a de facto distress, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The defendant's above assertion is not accepted.

B. Furthermore, as to the amount of consolation money, the amount of consolation money is revealed by the health team, the marriage period between the Plaintiff and C, the content and period of the misconduct between the Defendant and C, the impact of the misconduct on family relationship, and the Defendant's misconduct

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 2018.10.10 2018가단103573

-창원지방법원 2018.09.12 2017가단117391

-서울동부지방법원 2019.08.30 2019가단113223

-부산지방법원서부지원 2020.08.20 2020가단101384

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.09.19 2019나4914