2014drid25562 Divorce, etc.

GuA (************ 2***********))

Address Busan Shipping Daegu

Busan Gangseo-gu

The Korea Legal Aid Corporation

KimB (**************************))

The plaintiff is the same as the plaintiff.

Busan Southern-gu

(************************))

Reference domicile Busan Young-gu

2. KimD (********* 3*********))

Busan Southern-gu

The plaintiff is the same as the plaintiff of the case.

January 15, 2016

February 5, 2016

1. The plaintiff and the defendant are divorced.

2. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 20 million won consolation money and 20% per annum from May 21, 2015 to September 30, 2015, and 15% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

3. Each of the plaintiffs is designated as a person with parental authority and career of the case principal KimCC, and the defendant is designated as a person with parental authority and career of the case principal KimD.

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

5. The costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

6. Paragraph 2 can be provisionally executed.

The damages for delay of consolation money shall be paid at the rate of 20% per annum from the day following the delivery of the written amendment of the purport of the claim of this case to the day of complete payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff and the defendant living together from December 2, 2009 and had the principal of the case as the legal couple who reported marriage on September 24, 2010.

B. The Defendant committed assault against the Plaintiff during the marriage life while taking a serious desire. As a result, the Plaintiff was subject to consultation on domestic violence on November 201, 201, May 5, 2013, and March 3, 2014. On March 30, 2014, the Plaintiff was under a separate possession with the Defendant until now.

C. At present, the case principal KimCC is currently being raised by the plaintiff side, and the case principal KimD is being raised by the defendant side.

D. The defendant does not have any response, such as being served with the complaint of this case and being present on the date of pleading.

[Grounds for Recognition: Each entry in Gap evidence 1 to 11 (including branch numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination on the claim for divorce and consolation money

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the marriage relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant cannot be recovered any longer.

The fundamental and principal liability caused by the failure is against the defendant who has exercised violence during the marriage period. This constitutes a cause of judicial divorce as prescribed by Article 840 subparag. 3 and 6 of the Civil Act, and thus, the plaintiff's claim for divorce has merit.

B. Meanwhile, it is clear in light of the empirical rule that the plaintiff suffered a considerable mental suffering due to the failure of the marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant due to the above reasons attributable to the defendant. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the mental suffering in cash. In full view of all the circumstances shown in the arguments of this case, such as the plaintiff and the defendant's age, the process and period of marital life, the circumstances of the marriage dissolution, the degree of responsibility for the marriage dissolution, etc., it is reasonable to determine the amount of consolation money to be paid to the plaintiff by the defendant as KRW 20,000,000 for the plaintiff.

C. Therefore, the Plaintiff and the Defendant are divorced, and the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for consolation money of KRW 20 million, and the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for consolation money of KRW 20 million and the following day after the Plaintiff’s written amendment of the purport of the instant claim was served on the Defendant. From May 21, 2015 to September 30, 2015, 20% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, from May 2

C. The Plaintiff is obligated to pay damages for delay at the rate of 15% per annum from the date of full payment (the Plaintiff claimed payment of damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum for the period from October 1, 2015. However, the statutory interest rate stipulated in the main sentence of Article 3(1) of the same Act was amended by Presidential Decree No. 26553 to 20% per annum to 15% per annum from October 1, 2015, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim for payment of damages for delay exceeding 15% per annum is without merit).

3. Determination as to a request for designation of a person with parental authority and a custodian

At present, the principal KimCC in this case is currently being brought up by the plaintiff side, the principal KimD in this case is being brought up by the defendant side, and taking into account all the circumstances revealed in the arguments of this case, such as the plaintiff and the defendant's marital life and distress situation, the intent and parenting attitude of the plaintiff and the defendant side, the age of the principal of this case, and other circumstances, it is reasonable to designate the plaintiff as the person with parental authority and the rearing authority of the principal of this case for the sake of smooth gender and welfare of the principal of this case, and as the person with parental authority and the rearing of the principal of this case, the defendant as the person

4. Conclusion

If so, the plaintiff's claim for divorce is accepted on the ground of the reasons, and the claim for consolation money is accepted on the ground of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed on the ground of the reasons, and the claim for the designation of a person with parental authority and a person with custody of the principal of the case is determined as above. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Hong-chul