2012dern 4596 Divorce, etc.

2012dern 5698 (Counterclaim Divorce, etc.)

A

Attorney Jeong-hee et al., Counsel for the defendant

B

Attorney Kim Byung-hee, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

C

January 24, 2013

March 7, 2013

1. The principal lawsuit and counterclaim are divorced between the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

2. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) pays 5,000,000 won as consolation money to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

3. The person with parental authority and the custodian of the principal of the case shall designate the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff.

4. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) may visitation the principal of the case as follows, and the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff) must guarantee the visitation right.

(a) Time and frequency;

1) The first, second, second, fourth Saturday from 10:0 to Sundays 20:00 (including accommodation)

(ii) from 10:00 to 20:00 on the first day of the annual holiday (including accommodation);

3) Other days from 10:00 to 20:00 (where the date of visitation is continuous, from 10:00 to 20:00 of the date of the first visitation, including accommodation, within the limit of 20 days each year.

However, in order for the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) to conduct the visitation right under this section, the Plaintiff must notify the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) of the designation two weeks prior to the date of designation.

(b) Method of delivery and acceptance of the principal of the case: Delivery and acceptance at the residence of the principal of the case.

5. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s remaining claims are dismissed.

6. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the remainder 1/2 by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) in addition to the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim.

7. Paragraph 2 can be provisionally executed.

The principal lawsuit: The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant; hereinafter "the plaintiff") and the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff; hereinafter "the defendant") are divorced. The defendant shall pay 50 million won as consolation money to the plaintiff. The defendant shall designate the plaintiff as a person with parental authority and the guardian of the principal of the case. The defendant shall pay 150 million won per month to the plaintiff as the child support of the principal of the case from the date the judgment became final to the date the principal of the case becomes adult.

Counterclaim: The plaintiff and the defendant shall be divorced. The defendant shall be designated as a person in parental authority and the guardian of the principal of the case.

1. Judgment on the claim of the principal lawsuit and counterclaim divorce and the claim of consolation money in the principal lawsuit

After Gap 1 to 4, 7 through 9, 11, 12 (including No. 1; hereinafter the same shall apply) and Eul 1 to 6, 9 to 11, and the inquiry results on the family affairs of this court's family affairs investigator, the plaintiff and the defendant were legally married after the marriage report on May 8, 2008, and they had the principal of this case under 0, while entering the first name after marriage, the plaintiff and the defendant got out of 00 and did not come out of 1 to 20. The plaintiff was 1 to 0,000, and the defendant did not come out of 1 to 10,000,000,000 were 1 to 2,000,000,000,000,000 were 1 to 2,000,000,000,000,000.

위 인정사실에 의하면 원고와 피고의 혼인관계는 이미 파탄에 이르렀고, 위와 같이 파탄에 이른 것은 슬기롭게 갈등을 해결하지 못하고, 대화를 단절하며 원고를 폭행한 피고의 잘못과, 마찬가지로 피고 및 시댁과의 관계를 원만히 유지하지 못하고, 혼인기간 동안 다른 이성과 짧은 기간 동안 1,500통이 넘는 전화와 문자를 주고받은 원고의 잘못이 경합하여 발생한 결과로 봄이 상당하다. 따라서 원고의 본소 이혼청구와 피고의 반소 이혼청구는 모두 민법 제840조 제6호에서 정한 이혼사유가 있는 것으로 판단된다.

Meanwhile, as seen earlier, it is determined that the Plaintiff’s claim for consolation money was attributable to both the Plaintiff and the Defendant, as seen earlier, and the Defendant’s marital relationship was attributable to both the Plaintiff and the Defendant. However, it appears that the Defendant, who committed assault, such as having committed violent acts against the Plaintiff for a period of three months of pregnancy, and lighting the Plaintiff’s trees at the end of the horse match, is more liable to the Defendant. Therefore, the Defendant is obliged to bring the Plaintiff a emotional distress due to divorce in money. Therefore, the amount of consolation money shall be determined as KRW 5 million, considering the period of marriage, age, and distress of the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and the circumstances leading up to the failure

2. Determination on the designation of the principal lawsuit and counterclaim person with parental authority and custody

In addition to the above facts and the purport of the whole arguments in the family investigation result of the family affairs investigator of this court, the plaintiff and the defendant are not in a situation in which both public officials can raise the principal of the case directly, but they are deemed to have sufficient heat and qualities concerning rearing, and there is no big difference between both parties' other rearing environment (economic situation, the possibility and attitude of raising family members who are rearing assistants).

In the end, from the perspective of the welfare of the principal of this case, even if the plaintiff or the defendant is designated as the person in parental authority and the guardian of the principal of this case, it seems that the first plaintiff and the defendant should be relieved of this case.

However, for the smooth fostering of the principal of the case, visitation rights with the Plaintiff should be smoothly conducted. In light of the various circumstances in the process of the lawsuit (the two parties were non-cooperative in the visitation rights of the principal of the case, and both immediately and immediately apply for the prior disposition), etc., it is necessary to clearly determine matters concerning visitation rights with the designation of a person with parental authority and a custodian. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s visitation rights should be determined ex officio as prescribed in Paragraph 4 of the Disposition.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, since the principal lawsuit and counterclaim divorce claim are well-grounded, all of them are accepted, and the plaintiff's claim of consolation money is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claim of consolation money is dismissed as there is no reasonable ground. It is so decided as per Disposition with regard to the designation of the principal lawsuit and counterclaim person and person with parental authority and person with parental authority as above.

Effective quantity of the judge