beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 13,00,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from December 31, 2014 to August 19, 2015.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is currently the spouse of Nonparty C (hereinafter “Nonindicted Party C”), and around 2005, the Plaintiff is married with Nonparty on October 10, 2009, following the teaching period.
B. As of 2014, the Defendant was an unmarried woman working as a nurse at the time of the Incheon Dong-gu Hospital and the non-party, who entered into a relationship with the non-party at around 2003 (round the beginning of the age of the Defendant 20 and the first half of the age of the Defendant), and was in hedging with the non-party.
C. In February 2014, the Nonparty used the clinic called “E,” and attempted to hold the Defendant with the Defendant, who had access to the instant Mesing Mesing via the NAN Mesing, and revealed his identity against the Defendant, the Nonparty, who was old pet, was given the Defendant with his family life and work history, news, hobby, etc. for several months, together with the daily dialogue with his family life and work history, news, hobbies, etc., and was given with sexual expression or non-refluences in the past, and resumed online contacts with the Defendant from time to time.
(The defendant did not know the non-party's telephone number, and it seems that the defendant sent the above Messenger only in the long distance.)
The Nonparty and the Defendant met at Defendant’s coffee shop on March 1, 2014, in addition to the aforementioned online Messen dialogue, and furthermore, the same year in line with the Defendant’s hospital watch.
4.20.Landscapings; and
4. Around 27. At the low time zone of Sundays, only 20,000 in the office for watch keeping service at the above hospital was going to rest.
E. The Plaintiff, the Nonparty, and the Nonparty’s husband and wife were subject to the Nonparty’s medical care and treatment charge, etc., which began from November 2013. However, on May 2014, the Plaintiff became aware of all of the instant Messenger dialogues through the Nonparty’s mobile phone, etc., and led the Nonparty to the Nonparty to seek out-of-the-counter facts with the Defendant. The Nonparty was sexual intercourse with the Plaintiff on the 25th of the same month, and the Defendant, which was two times at the above hospital’s office.