logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.01.12 2015가단5089430
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 15,00,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual interest thereon shall be 5% from January 31, 2015 to January 12, 2018, and the next day.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a legal spouse who completed the marriage report with C on July 3, 2008.

B. From January 15, 2015 to June 2015, the Defendant was aware of the fact that C was married to the Plaintiff, and C was also aware of the fact that it was married to C.

C. On January 30, 2015, the Defendant, after taking lessons, had sexual intercourse with C around the 31st day of the same month, under the influence of alcohol with other C and other students who received dispatched education.

Although the Defendant committed an unlawful act against the Defendant’s wife D who became aware of the foregoing facts, the Defendant thereafter contacted with C, and D filed a lawsuit claiming divorce and consolation money against the Defendant (Seoul Family Court 2016Dhap37501) and a lawsuit claiming compensation against C.

Seoul Family Court (Seoul Family Court 2015ddan33687). e.

On June 2, 2017, the first instance judgment was rendered on June 2, 2017, stating that “D and the Defendant are divorced, the Defendant pays 30 million won as consolation money to D, and the Defendant shall perform the procedure for transferring the name of the Defendant to D with the division of property.” The lawsuit brought against D against D, which “C shall pay 15 million won as consolation money and delay damages to D.”

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 to 3, Evidence No. 1 to 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The act of a third party making a judgment by committing an unlawful act with the spouse to infringe on or interfere with common life of the married couple falling under the essence of marriage and to inflict mental pain on the spouse by infringing on his/her right as the spouse, constitutes a tort in principle;

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997, Nov. 20, 2014). According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant knowingly known that C has a spouse, thereby having sexual intercourse with C.

arrow