2013Dhap1012 Compensation ( de facto marriage reversal)

A (son)

B (son)

September 18, 2014

November 20, 2014

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The defendant pays 100,000,000 won to the plaintiff as consolation money.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff became aware of ○○ University and C (a leader) who is a guidance professor while attending the master’s and master’s degree course, and was in alliance with C from around December 2009, and was in a state of being a legal spouse and children at the time of the Plaintiff and C’s multicurricular teaching system.

B. On February 2012, 2012, the Plaintiff sent text messages to the effect that C would die without maintaining the relationship with C several times from that time to October 2013, 2013, or would know about an inappropriate relationship between C and his/her family members, including his/her wife, etc. In the process, C divided the circumstances between C and his/her husband for two years from 2010 to 2012, and promised to live together with the Plaintiff at the Plaintiff’s residence after one year. “C and the Plaintiff” on May 11, 2013, “I compel C and the Plaintiff to prepare assault to their respective purport, and have conflict between C and the Plaintiff on April 19, 2012 and 31, respectively.

C. Meanwhile, in 2013, the Defendant was a graduate student who was enrolled in the ○○ University and the master’s degree course, and C was the Defendant’s leader, and the Plaintiff began to doubt the relationship between C and the Defendant from April 2013.

D. From May 7, 2013 to May 11, 2013, the Plaintiff sought a content of conversation with other professors, assistant instructors, and undergraduate students. From that time, the Plaintiff continued to doubt between C and the Defendant, demanded C and the Defendant to sign a telephone or complete the relationship between C and the Defendant by sending text messages on several occasions, and was punished for dispute. On July 2013, the Defendant filed a complaint with the police against the Plaintiff for defamation, etc., and C also filed a complaint under suspicion of intimidation, etc.

The Defendant sent text messages to the ○○ University and graduate students to the effect that the Defendant had sexual intercourses in C and an officetel near the school and the content thereof was sought.

E. The Plaintiff was indicted of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitual Intimidation), coercion, injury, violation of the Protection of Communications Secrets Act, violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. (Defamation) based on the statement of false facts about the Defendant (Defamation) due to the act as described in the above B and D, and the lower court convicted the Defendant of all the above crimes on September 17, 2014, and sentenced the Plaintiff to a probation of two years and suspension of qualifications and one year of suspension of qualifications and one year of suspension of qualifications, and a community service order of 120 hours for the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff’s prosecutor and the Plaintiff’s appeal are pending (○○ District Court No. 2014No2192).

F. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff and C metd each other’s residence from time to time during the teaching period, had sexual intercourses with each other, and also got overseas travel. around July 2012, C divorced from each other’s spouse around September 2012.

[Grounds for Recognition] 1, 3, 8 through 12, 14, 16, 18 through 22 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), 4 through 8, 7, 15, 15, and 1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings in this court

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion

From 2010 to 2013, the Plaintiff was living in a de facto marital relationship under the premise of marriage with C. However, the Defendant committed an unlawful act, such as committing a sexual intercourse with C during that period, and led to the failure of a de facto marital relationship between C and C. This led to the failure of a de facto marital relationship between the Plaintiff and C. The Plaintiff caused severe mental pain and economic loss by unfairly destroying a de facto marital relationship due to the Defendant’s erroneous act, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay 100,000,000 won as consolation money to the Plaintiff.

B. Determination

(1) A de facto marriage refers to the combination of men and women, not recognized as legal, because the parties had an intention to marry between the Plaintiff and their spouses, and did not report their marital status openly. Therefore, in order to obtain protection equivalent to a de facto marriage, the mere circumstance is insufficient solely for the existence of a simple marital relationship or a intermittent marital relationship between the parties, and the existence of a substance of marital life, which is recognized as communal life in light of social norms. Here, “a” means the intention to engage in communal life as a social and de facto couple, and thus, it means the systematic effect of the Plaintiff’s marriage system, namely, the intent to obtain rights and obligations from the Plaintiff and their spouses. Furthermore, whether a spouse has an intention to enter into a marital relationship with the Plaintiff and his/her spouse after being able to reasonably consider whether there were two or more years of marriage, namely, an economic relationship between the Plaintiff and his/her spouse and his/her spouse, and whether there was an objective ethical and ethical relationship between the Plaintiff and his/her spouse, as seen earlier, should be determined in light of the legal principles as seen earlier.

(3) Furthermore, the evidence presented by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize the failure of a de facto marital relationship between the Plaintiff and C due to either the Defendant’s wrongful act or the Defendant’s mistake, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be accepted.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

The presiding judge shall admonish judges;

Judges Kim Jong-sung

Judges Lee Jin-hee