2016dward200633 Damage (Divorce)

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

Address Jinju City

Nationality Vietnam

Attorney Lee Do-young

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

Busan Jin-gu

May 18, 2016

June 1, 2016

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 10 million won with 15% interest per annum from the day after the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case to the day of full payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff is a woman of Vietnam's nationality. The defendant, as a male of the Republic of Korea's nationality, reported marriage on February 25, 2009, and two persons have KimCC as children.

B. During the marriage period, the Plaintiff was at home with the Plaintiff during the period of marriage, and the Plaintiff was finally going to work on November 12, 2013.

C. Accordingly, the Defendant filed a divorce lawsuit against the Plaintiff (2014ddivone 3890 of the Busan Family Court), and divorced with the Plaintiff on June 18, 2014. The Defendant was sentenced to a judgment that “the designation of the Defendant as a person with parental authority and a custodian of KimCC” and the said judgment became final and conclusive on July 5, 2014.

D. After doing so, the Plaintiff filed a request against the Defendant to permit the visitation to KimCC (the Busan Family Court 2015 saw 20055 saw 20055), but was dismissed on November 23, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff is obligated to pay consolation money to the plaintiff, since the defendant treated the plaintiff as Vietnam female during the marriage and forced to leave the plaintiff at a high level. Thus, the plaintiff and the defendant's marital relationship were dismissed due to the defendant's reasons attributable to the defendant. The plaintiff's argument is without merit, since it is difficult to recognize this only with the evidence submitted by the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Lee Jae-chul