logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2019.09.04 2019나10033
손해배상(기)
Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

2. Of the appeal costs, the part relating to the Plaintiff’s appeal is the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. In principle, a third party's act of infringing on a couple's communal life falling under the essence of marriage or interfering with the maintenance thereof, and infringing on a spouse's right as the spouse, thereby causing mental pain to the spouse constitutes a tort.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997 Decided November 20, 2014).B.

According to the overall purport of evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 3, and 5, the Plaintiff and C are legally married couples who completed the marriage report on May 14, 2004, and have three minor children under the chain, and the Defendant committed unlawful acts, such as having sexual intercourse several times from July 2016 to October 2016.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay consolation money in an appropriate amount to the plaintiff, since it is obvious in light of the rule of experience that the plaintiff suffered from severe mental pain, by misappropriation, such as making a sexual intercourse with C, which is equivalent to the essence of the marriage, infringed on the plaintiff's common life of the married couple, obstructed the maintenance thereof, infringed on the plaintiff's right as the plaintiff's spouse.

C. The defendant asserts that the plaintiff cannot exercise his right to claim damages against the defendant since the plaintiff used the defendant's fraudulent act with C.

According to the statement in Eul evidence No. 4, it can be recognized that the plaintiff made a statement to the defendant after October 2016, 2016, such as "One-half Audit Manual" and "I do not know if a person is divorced."

However, solely on the facts of the above recognition alone, the Plaintiff used the unlawful act between the Defendant and C.

It is difficult to deem that the Defendant renounced the right to claim compensation for damages.

The defendant's assertion is not accepted.

2. Scope of liability for damages

A. Details, duration, and degree of misconduct, and the marriage period of the Plaintiff and C; and

arrow