Whether the existence of both husband and wife’s non-performance of the duty of living together and the duty of cooperation for support constitutes a serious reason for making it difficult to continue the marriage (affirmative)

If both married couple have the power of marriage, they live with their own consciousness, separate them, and they live with their own income and live in the same way as South Korea, it is the time when there is a serious reason that it is difficult to continue marriage under Article 840 subparagraph 6 of the Civil Code.

Article 840 Subparag. 2 of the Civil Act, Article 840 Subparag. 6 of the Civil Act

Claimant

appellees

Daejeon District Court of the first instance (Law No. 87d61, Jun. 1, 200)

The appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the appellee.

The appellant and the appellee shall be divorced.

The adjudication on the cost of trial shall be borne by the respondent.

The original adjudication shall be revoked.

The claimant's claim is dismissed.

Trial costs shall be borne by the claimant in both the first and second trials.

In full view of Gap evidence Nos. 1 (No. 2), Gap evidence No. 2-1 and 2 (the certified copy of the resident registration by head of each household), the written report of the report of the investigation by the investigator of the court below's Lee Jong-dae, and the testimony by Lee Jae-seok, the claimant, who was married on Aug. 12, 1953 and the non-party 1, who was married on Aug. 12, 1953, delivered three South and North three years under his/her chain of pleading, and the non-party 1, who was married to the defendant on May 24, 1971, was living together with the non-party 2, who was married to the defendant on Sep. 28, 1983, and was married to the defendant and the defendant, and the respondent had no other family relation between the defendant and the non-party 1 and the non-party 2, who was the non-party 1 and the defendant's other family member's name during the period of two months after marriage.

According to the above facts of recognition, since there are many children who are suffering from both the claimant and the respondent, they live separately and have left as South Korea. The marital life between the claimant and the respondent is not fulfilled the duty of living together and the duty of cooperation for support to be kept in the marriage life, and the marital life between the claimant and the respondent has reached the failure. The fundamental cause of the failure is moving back to the place of residence where the respondent was living in the marriage, which constitutes a cause of judicial divorce under subparagraphs 2 and 6 of Article 840 of the Civil Code, so the claimant's petition for divorce is justifiable.

Therefore, the appeal for divorce by the claimant is reasonable, and therefore, the appeal for divorce is just and the appeal by the respondent is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the respondent. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Jong-ju (Presiding Justice)