2019drid207420 Divorce, etc.

A

Section B.

January 12, 2021

February 2, 2021

1. The plaintiff and the defendant are divorced.

2. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. As consolation money, 20 million won and 5% per annum from July 25, 2019 to February 2, 2021, and 12% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment; and

B. It shall pay 139 million won with the division of property and 5% interest per annum from the day following the day when this judgment becomes final and conclusive to the day of full payment.

3. The plaintiff's remaining claim for consolation money is dismissed.

4. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;

5. The above paragraph 2 (a) may be provisionally executed.

The disposition 1 and the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 50 million won as consolation money and 5% interest per annum from the day following the day of service of a copy of the complaint of this case to the day of this judgment and 12% interest per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment, and shall pay 174,898,812 won as division of property and 5% interest per annum from the day of this judgment to the day of full payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff and the defendant are legally married couple in 1977, and they are currently adult children and their offspring.

B. The Defendant, during the marriage period, neglected his/her duty to care for home affairs and children, and neglected to pay his/her living expenses to the Plaintiff, and neglected the Plaintiff, and neglected his/her severe humiliation and verbal abuse. In addition, the Plaintiff performed his/her best to avoid the Defendant’s unilateral behavior for the peace of home, and fals and fals and fals for three years for suffering from home care and dementia, and continued to engage in economic activities.

D. Meanwhile, the Defendant had been able to unilaterally decide on important matters, such as economic issues. In particular, there was a dispute between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s mother suffering from dementia in 2000, and the Plaintiff’s mother borrowed money to the Plaintiff’s female students, and thereafter, he borrowed money to the Plaintiff’s female students, and subsequently, raised the intention of the Section, and the Plaintiff purchased the remaining money from the apartment sales price residing in around April 2010, and then granted them to the Plaintiff for the purchase of the apartment in its name.

E. In the event that the behavior of ordinary family members does not appear in mind, it was difficult for the Defendant to lock the door door and refuse to talk. After the death of the shot machine, the Plaintiff’s home home to attend the church was considered as an issue, and the Defendant did not open the door door in the same way as the Plaintiff was able to immediately return home at the end of 2016, and the Plaintiff did not open the door in the same manner.

F. On March 2018, the Plaintiff, who was in the house as above, was living separately with the Defendant, and the Plaintiff donated the instant apartment to the Defendant to return the apartment in the name of son other than the instant apartment.

G. However, around April 2019, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against son to claim restitution of unjust enrichment equivalent to the purchase price of apartment, but the above court rendered a judgment dismissing the Defendant’s claim on June 17, 2020, and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

H. On June 12, 2019, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking divorce against the Defendant on June 12, 2019, i.e., the dispute between the Defendant and son.

[Ground of recognition] The items of evidence Nos. 1 through 11, B through 11, 15, 16, 18, and 21, the family investigation report by the family investigator, and the purport of the pleading

2. Judgment on divorce and claim of consolation money

A. Determination

1) Divorce claim: there are reasons under Article 840 subparagraphs 3 and 6 of the Civil Act

2) Claim for consolation money: there are reasons within the extent of 20 million won in part.

B. Grounds for determination

1) The failure of a matrimonial relationship: Various circumstances shown in the arguments in the instant case, such as the marital relationship and conflict situation of the couple previously recognized, the period of separation, the Plaintiff’s intent to divorce appears to be firmly established, and the Defendant, who first failed to divorce, recognized the Plaintiff’s intention to divorce and consented to divorce.

2) As seen in the above facts finding that the principal liability of the marriage failure lies in the defendant, as seen above, the defendant acted primarily during the marriage period, and did not take a serious bath and verbal abuse, etc. The plaintiff thought that his family was fright, and did not take advantage of the defendant’s snow and unfair treatment. The plaintiff also took place in economic activities other than his house, children’s bat and saturine’s fat, and the defendant did not take care of and help the plaintiff’s old age and bather. Accordingly, the plaintiff’s complaint against the defendant who does not respect himself as equal spouse was raised, and it seems difficult to exclude the defendant who did not go through a conversation, and to ex post facto notify the defendant of important matters, such as economic issues. Although the plaintiff and the defendant’s family relationship were no sufficient effort to resolve conflicts between the plaintiff and the plaintiff through dialogue and opinion, the plaintiff did not appear to have been able to accept the plaintiff’s property failure during the marriage period and to pay consolation money to the plaintiff in this case.

C. Sub-committee

Therefore, the plaintiff is divorced from the defendant, and the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 20 million won as consolation money and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum under the Civil Act from July 25, 2019 to February 2, 2021, which is the day following the day this decision was rendered, and 12% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment.

3. Determination as to the claim for division of property

A. Property subject to division at the time of judicial divorce at the time of division of property and its amount shall be based on the date of the closing of argument at the fact-finding court, but the circumstances shall be taken into account after separation or failure until the time of trial (see Supreme Court Decisions 9Meu906, Sept. 22, 2000; 95Meu1192, 1208, Dec. 23, 1996). This case shall be based on the date of closing of argument, but the active and passive property currently owned by the Plaintiff as of June 12, 2019 shall be presumed to be possessed as it is, unless there is clear proof by the parties as to the fact that there was a change in the purpose of common life of the married couple after the Plaintiff’s divorce at the time of division of property. (However, if the Plaintiff and the Defendant agree with each other and raise any objection to the value expressed in terms of the statement or the result of the order to submit financial transaction information, etc., the value shall be determined according to the order).

(b) Property and value to be divided;

1) The value of the property to be divided and the value thereof are as shown in the annexed sheet of "Detailed Statement of Property Division".

2) The determination of the parties’ assertion is as stated in the column of “see, e.g., Claim of the Party.”

(c) The ratio and method of division of property;

1) Division ratio of property: Plaintiff 50%, Defendant 50%

[Reasons for Determination] The details of acquisition and use of active properties subject to division, the extent of the contribution of the plaintiff and the defendant to the formation and maintenance thereof (the defendant's workplace life during the marriage period and became the main source of home economy, but only a part of the defendant's retirement pay is reflected in the defendant's retirement pay, and the plaintiff is also during the marriage

Considering the fact that the Defendant’s mother has contributed to the formation and maintenance of property in parallel with the company’s history, raising of children, economic activities, and the formation and maintenance of property, the KRW 90 million, which was gathered by the Defendant’s mother, was the source of property formation, but the Plaintiff was actually making every effort to form property, such as the resale of real estate, etc., and contributed to the formation of property, such as the Plaintiff’s active property, the background leading up to the occurrence of income and property, the age of the Plaintiff and the Defendant, occupation and income, the process and duration of marital life

2) The method of division of property: The active property under each person’s name and the negative property shall be reverted to the Plaintiff in a fixed manner, taking into account the name and form of the property subject to division, the developments leading up to acquisition, convenience of division, etc.; as a result, the portion of the amount ultimately reverted to the Plaintiff according to the division of property shall be determined by the Defendant

3) Property division amount that the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff

[Calculation Form] ① The Plaintiff’s share of net property of the Plaintiff and Defendant according to the division of property

210,144,324 won (won, Defendant’s net property totaling KRW 420,288,649 x 0.5) ② The amount calculated by deducting the Plaintiff’s net property from the amount under the above paragraph (1) (1) is KRW 139,343,960 (the Plaintiff’s net property - KRW 210,144,324 - the Plaintiff’s net property 70,80,364) ③ Property division amount the Defendant pays to the Plaintiff.

2. Amount of KRW 139 million up to the amount under the above paragraph.

D. Sub-committee

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 10 million won as division of property and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum under the Civil Act from the day following the day on which this judgment becomes final and conclusive to the day of full payment.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for divorce is reasonable, and the plaintiff's claim for consolation money is accepted within the extent of the above recognition, and the remainder is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition with respect to division of property as above.

Judge Lee Jae-Un,

A list of divided properties;

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.