logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2013.10.30 2013노691
공전자기록등불실기재등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The court below convicted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case despite the intention to marry with F in fact and maintain a marital life. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (three million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) When Article 815 subparag. 1 of the Civil Act provides for the grounds of nullity of marriage between the parties “when there is no agreement on marriage between the parties to a marriage,” the case refers to the case where there is no agreement between the parties to create a mental or physical combination recognized as a couple under the social concept. If only one of the parties has the intent to establish such a marital relationship, and the other party lacks such intent, the marriage should be deemed null and void even if there was an intention to establish a legal status relationship between the parties as a couple due to the agreement on the report of marriage itself, even though there was an intention to establish a marital relationship between the parties to the marriage, the marriage should be deemed null and void if there was no agreement between the parties to the marriage (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Meu574, Jun. 10, 2010). 2) The Defendant left a separate marriage after the marriage with F, but this is the case where F would have maintained a livelihood by punishing money rather than nursing the Defendant as a closed cancer.

However, the judgment of the court below, in detail, judged that the defendant did not have an intention to marry as stated in the facts charged, entered the facts of marriage with the defendant on the F's family register transfer network and exercised it. The judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and the defendant's statement that the F did not attend the defendant who was the spouse at the end of the end of the end of the terminal cancer and did not fit the rules of experience.

arrow