logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2018.04.25 2017가단64432
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 25,00,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from November 8, 2017 to April 25, 2018.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff is a legal spouse who reported the marriage with C on December 30, 2005, and has one child attending an elementary school among them.

B. The Defendant, despite being aware of the existence of a spouse C, maintained the inhumane relationship, such as with C from August 2016 to July 2017, at any time in the studio, etc. separately sought by C from around August 2016 to around July 2017.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence 1 through 9 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The act of a third party making a judgment by committing an unlawful act with the spouse, thereby infringing on a couple's communal life falling under the essence of marriage or interfering with the maintenance thereof, and infringing on the spouse's right as the spouse, thereby causing mental pain to the spouse, constitutes a tort in principle.

According to the above facts, since the defendant knew of the fact that he had a legal spouse and maintained a Buddhist relationship with C and suffered mental suffering from the plaintiff by infringing the plaintiff's common life of the plaintiff and C, he is obliged to compensate for damages caused by the above tort, and is obliged to inflict mental suffering on the plaintiff.

With respect to the amount of consolation money, it is reasonable to determine consolation money as KRW 25,00,000 in consideration of all the circumstances shown in the pleadings, such as health class, the above-mentioned facts, the degree and period of the misconduct committed by the defendant and C, the details thereof, the marriage period and family relationship between the plaintiff and C, and the influence of the defendant's misconduct on the plaintiff's marital relationship

Therefore, the defendant, as a result of the above illegal act, is reasonable to dispute over the existence and scope of the obligation of performance of this case from November 8, 2017 after the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case sought by the plaintiff as to the plaintiff from November 8, 2017 to April 25, 2018, the date of this decision, which is 5% per annum under the Civil Act, and the next day.

arrow