1. Jeju District Court Decision 2018Kahap 10363 No. 1-B of the order of May 16, 2019 in a disposition case.

Facts of recognition

In full view of the facts without dispute and evidence submitted by the plaintiff and the defendant and the purport of the whole arguments, the following facts can be acknowledged:

Although the plaintiff and the defendant have been divorced by agreement around July 2018, they still remain a large amount of gymar, they are still under dispute over the payment of child support and interview.

The Plaintiff filed an application against the Defendant for a disposition of Jeju District Court 2018Kahap 10363, and the Jeju District Court notified the following decision (hereinafter “instant decision”) on May 16, 2019, and became final and conclusive around that time.

1. The debtor (the defendant in this case) shall:

(a) shall not access the creditor within 100 meters against the creditor’s will or visit the Seoul Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government apartment house, D heading, office building, or F heading, the creditor’s residence;

(b) shall not interfere with the peace and business of creditors by making a phone call, either directly or through a third party, or by sending a voice message, e-mail, text message, Kakaootox message or any similar form of personal ston message.

2. The debtor would pay to the creditor the amount of KRW 200,00 each time of the violation when he/she violates the order of Paragraph 1. However, even thereafter, the defendant sent the letter to the plaintiff as shown in the attached Form.

The Defendant was unable to coordinate the Defendant’s decentralization by sending repeated text messages that slandered the Plaintiff with his own emotional testimony, and by sending the Defendant’s decentralization again upon the Plaintiff’s singing room, with the Plaintiff’s flusing of coercion, and by sending another flusing letter. (The Defendant’s failure to coordinate decentralization is not an error by the Plaintiff, but the Defendant’s own issue.

Therefore, the plaintiff sent a letter to criticize the defendant by recognizing self-related problems and providing counseling to solve the problem.

The defendant shall raise an objection to the cause of the claim.