2015u20043 Divorce, etc.

2015u20050 Divorce, etc.

Isa*********************)**

Busan Address

Busan District Court

Attorney Lee Do-young

BankB (********************)**)

Address Changwon-si

Busan District Court

Attorney Public-service Advocates

1. thisCC (*******************)***)

2. Eddd (********************))

3. EE (**********************)))

As to the case principal's address and reference domicile as to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)

Busan Family Court Decision 2014Ra200332 (main office), 2014Radon decided February 6, 2015

459 (Counterclaim) Judgment

November 5, 2015

November 26, 2015

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part on the claim for divorce and consolation money in the principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall be modified as follows: (a) The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) shall be divorced by means of the principal lawsuit and counterclaim.

B. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s claim of consolation money against the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff) is dismissed, respectively.

2. The remaining appeal by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is dismissed.

3. The total costs of a lawsuit shall be borne by each person in combination with a principal lawsuit and a counterclaim.

1. Purport of claim

A. The principal lawsuit. The plaintiff (the counter-party defendant; hereinafter referred to as the "Plaintiff") and the defendant (the counter-party plaintiff; hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") are divorced. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 30 million won as consolation money and 20% interest per annum from the day following the delivery of a copy of the principal complaint of this case to the day of complete payment. The plaintiff shall be designated as the person with parental authority and the guardian of the principal of this case. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 40 million won per each principal of this case from the day following the delivery of a copy of the principal complaint of this case to the day before the principal of this case reaches his majority.

B. Counterclaim. The plaintiff and the defendant are divorced by counterclaim. The plaintiff shall pay to the defendant 30 million won as consolation money and 20% interest per annum from the next day of the delivery of a copy of the counterclaim of this case to the day of complete payment. The defendant shall be designated as a person with parental authority and the guardian of the principal of this case. The plaintiff shall pay to the defendant 40 million won per each person of the principal of this case from the day after the delivery of the counterclaim of this case as child support to the principal of this case until the day before the principal of this case reaches his majority.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the defendant's counterclaim is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

1. Determination as to the claim for divorce and consolation money, respectively, against the principal lawsuit and counterclaim

(a) Facts of recognition;

1) The plaintiff and the defendant are legally married couple who completed the marriage report on August 30, 2001, and have the principal of the case between them.

2) The Plaintiff and the Defendant had no particular property at the time of marriage, and had experienced economic difficulties due to lack of income. In addition, the Plaintiff was neglected at home during the marriage period, such as drinking frequently, drinking alcohol, and late returning games.

3) The Plaintiff and the Defendant frequently disputed the above problems, and in the process, the Plaintiff made verbal abuse to the Defendant before the parties to the case were viewed as the parties to the case.

4) The Plaintiff operated the tester’s trade name “**” from around 2012 to the Plaintiff. The Defendant was in charge of the above company’s accounting affairs and managed the funds. The Defendant did not receive any separate living expenses from the Plaintiff.

5) In the process of managing funds as above, the Defendant requested that the Plaintiff receive money without paying the money or personnel expenses from the customer, and demanded that the Plaintiff borrow money from the surrounding persons.

6) On April 26, 2013, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant gave back money to the customer and brought a dispute with the Defendant. During this process, the Defendant made verbal abuse, such as abusive language to the Defendant, and threatened the Defendant with the construction section. 7) around May 2013, the Defendant took back the principal of the instant case and was living separately with the Plaintiff until now.

8) Since then, the Plaintiff sent text messages that contain severe humiliation to the Defendant, and expressed the Defendant’s desire during the family investigation process.

[Ground of recognition] Gap's entry of Gap's evidence of Nos. 7, 8, 20, 22, 25, 29, 31, 42, 44, 47, Eul's investigation report of family affairs investigators, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

1) A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim for each divorce: A ground under Article 840 subparagraph 6 of the Civil Act exists.

2) Claim for consolation money for each principal lawsuit and counterclaim: None of the grounds

【Reasons for Determination】

(1) Recognition of the failure of marriage: Consideration of various circumstances, including the fact that the plaintiff and the defendant have been separated from May 2013 to the present time, and that the plaintiff and the defendant want a divorce through the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim of this case, and that there seems to be no possibility of restoring each other's trust and continuing the marital life.

② The responsibility for the failure of the marriage is both parties: (a) the cause of the failure of the marriage in this case is the cause of the failure of the marriage in question; (b) the Plaintiff cited the Defendant’s excessive debt, embezzlement of money, and fraud with Furgical intent; and (c) the Defendant cited verbal abuse, assault and unfair treatment, and economic neglect

In light of the above, the defendant's marital relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant is presumed to have been deepened by repeating the conflict while he neglected to understand the situation between both parties in the conflict and repeats the conflict, while unilaterally doubtful that the defendant did not take into account the management status of the company and the expenditure of living expenses, etc., and continuously renders a serious desire for the defendant, even if he did so, he did not cooperate with the plaintiff as a construction district. However, the defendant was also erroneous in inducing the conflict because he did not transparent management of the money, such as attempted to conceal the financial situation of the plaintiff while in charge of the management of the interior project. In light of the above, the conflict between the plaintiff and the defendant is likely to have been deepened by repeating the conflict while neglecting his efforts to understand the situation in the conflict situation, it is reasonable

In addition to the above examination, the reason for the remaining failure of the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s assertion is not sufficient to acknowledge the existence of such assertion only by the evidence submitted to this court, or it is difficult to view it as a cause of the dissolution of marriage by itself, and thus, it cannot be accepted as

Therefore, the plaintiff and the defendant are divorced by the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim, but all of the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim claims for consolation money shall not be accepted.

2. Determination on designation of a person with parental authority and a custodian and claim for child support

A. Considering all the circumstances revealed in the arguments of this case, such as the intent of the person with parental authority and the person with parental authority and the person with parental authority for the designation of the person with parental authority and the person with parental authority, the marriage life and failure of the plaintiff and the defendant, the defendant's intent and attitude of custody, the age and gender of the person with parental authority and the person with parental authority for the person with parental authority

B. Since March 8, 2014, the day following the day on which the copy of the counterclaim was served to the Defendant as requested by the Defendant, the Plaintiff is obligated to share the child support as his father. Considering all the circumstances revealed in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s occupation and income level, the age and status of custody of the principals of the instant case, and the equity of sharing, it is reasonable to determine that the principal of the instant case pays KRW 40,000 per 1 month as of the last day of each month, from March 8, 2014 to the day before the principal of the instant case reaches each adult age

3. Conclusion

Therefore, both the plaintiff and the defendant's principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall be accepted in their grounds, and both the principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall be dismissed without merit, and all of them shall be determined as above with respect to the designation of the person with parental authority and the person with parental authority and the person with parental authority, and the part of the claim for the child support. Since the part of the claim for divorce and consolation money in the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with different conclusions, this part of the plaintiff's appeal shall be accepted and the corresponding part in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be modified as above, and the remaining parts in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be justified as they are concluded, and the

The presiding judge, associate judge

Judges Kim Gin-jin

Judges Park Jong-hee