209 Gohap13449 Agreements

Kim A (67 years of birth, women)

Attorney Lee In-bok, Counsel for the plaintiff

Kim (67 years old, South)

October 14, 2009

November 4, 2009

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The defendant of the Gu office shall pay to the plaintiff 291,611,161 won with 20% interest per annum from the next day of the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case to the day of complete payment.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

around October 24, 1993, when the plaintiff married with the plaintiff on May 21, 2006, when the defendant married with the plaintiff on May 21, 2006, when the plaintiff was married, written a statement that "where the plaintiff is divorced with the plaintiff, 500,000 won shall be paid to the plaintiff as consolation money." After the agreement was reached on May 4, 2007, the plaintiff and the defendant paid a sum of 208,38,389 won to the plaintiff at the time of the above agreement. The defendant paid a sum of 208,38,389 won to the plaintiff at the time of the above agreement did not conflict between the parties, or it can be acknowledged by taking into account the overall purport of arguments in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, and 4, according to the above facts of recognition, the defendant has the duty to pay damages for delay to the plaintiff at the plaintiff's claim based on each of the above case.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The assertion

As to this, the defendant asserts to the effect that each of the instant statements was prepared according to the plaintiff's request without the intention to pay 500,000,000 won to the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff is well aware of such circumstances, and thus, the plaintiff cannot respond to the plaintiff's request.

B. Determination

(1) The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of arguments in evidence Nos. 1, 1, 1, 3, and 7, namely, as seen earlier, each of the instant statements, stating that “where the Defendant is divorced from the Plaintiff, 500,000 won shall be paid as consolation money” shall also exceed the Plaintiff under any circumstances, regardless of the reasons. The future living expenses and child support shall be paid as best, and they shall be sacrificed. Doing so doing. It is true that the Plaintiff will sacrifice for family economy and harmony. It is true that the Defendant’s assertion that it would be 00,000 won, which is not an abstract obligation of the Defendant for maintaining the above marriage and family life, constitutes 00,000 won, and that it would be impossible for the Defendant to make payment of 50,000 won as well as the amount of money to be paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiff, for a considerable period of 10,000,000 won for each of the instant claims for adjudication against the Plaintiff at the time of divorce.

(2) 가사 그렇지 않다 하더라도, 갑2호증, 을4, 5, 7호증의 각 기재에 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하면, 원고와 피고는 위 협의이혼 당시 원고와 피고의 공유(각 2분의 1 지분)로서 채권최고액 합계 380,000,000원인 근저당권이 설정되어 있던 서울 강동구 암사동 ○ 아파트 동 2406호를 피고 단독 소유로 하는 대신 피고가 위 아파트를 담보로 그 운영의 주식회사 ◆유통 명의로 추가대출을 받아 앞서 본 바와 같이 원고에게 208,388,389원을 지급하는 것으로 재산분할을 한 사실이 인정되고, 여기에 앞서 본 바와 같이 원고가 위 협의이혼 이후 상당한 기간 동안 이 사건 각서에 기한 청구를 하지 아니하고 있다가 피고의 위 심판청구가 있자 곧바로 이 사건 각서에 기한 약정금의 지급을 구하는 이 사건 소를 제기한 사정까지 보태어 보면, 원고와 피고는 위 재산분할로써 이 사건 각서상의 위 500,000,000원의 지급채무를 포함하여 위 협의이혼에 따른 재산분할이나 위자료 등의 법률관계를 마무리 짓기로 한 것으로 봄이 상당하다.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Application to the presiding judge;

Judge Senior Superintendent;

Judges Kim Gung-Un