2011Reu3405 Invalidity, etc.

- Kim (82 - 1)

Seoul Address

Seoul basic domicile

Attorney Jin-han et al.

- - (82 - 2)

Seoul Address

Seoul basic domicile

Seoul Family Court Decision 2011ddan39321 decided October 13, 2011

March 16, 2012

March 30, 2012

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. On February 10, 201, Seoul between the Plaintiff and the Defendant

The marriage reported to the head of Gwanak-gu is invalid. Preliminaryly, the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff

The Defendant’s revocation of marriage reported to the head of Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City on February 10, 201.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 2010, the Plaintiff and the Defendant first agreed to marrys around January 201, 201, and the date of weddings was set at 00:0 on April 9, 201, following the case of both parents, and the date of weddings was set at 0:0, and the weddings were made and the weddings were promised.

B. When the Plaintiff came to know of the information that he preferentially supplied a long-term rental house to the new marriage department at E.S. while seeking a new marriage house, he filed a marriage report with the Defendant prior to the marriage report on February 10, 201, and completed the marriage report on February 10, 201 as stated in the purport of the claim. On March 15, 2011, the Plaintiff offered an offer for a 59mm2, which is a long-term rental house, to be supplied first to 59m2, which is a long-term rental house, but did not receive the order of sale.

C. However, on March 31, 2011, the Defendant suspended the marriage preparation by holding that it is no longer possible for the Defendant to proceed with the marriage procedures, and on March 31, 2011, the Defendant clearly expressed its intention to resolve the marriage by preparing and delivering to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s mother the joint note, stating, “Sing - Kim - Kim to lead to marriage, Kim - to marriage, and deliver his mind, and Kim - Family to respond to this, at the time of coming to the litigation from his family.”

D. Ultimately, the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not live alone a day without reporting marriage, and did not live alone, and they brought the instant lawsuit seeking the invalidation of marriage, etc.

[Grounds for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7 (including number) and the purport of the whole pleading;

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff filed a report of marriage in advance to prepare a place of marriage after marriage, and the defendant refused to marry with the plaintiff after the report of marriage, and failed to form the substance of marriage as well as the substance of marriage such as living together or living together with the plaintiff. Thus, the plaintiff and the defendant asserted that the marriage constitutes null and void when there is no agreement of marriage, and sought confirmation of nullity of the above marriage.

B. Determination

(1) When there is no agreement between the parties on the grounds of nullity of marriage under Article 815 subparagraph 1 of the Civil Act, "when there is no agreement on the marriage" means that, as a couple under social norms, the parties have formed a community of living by combining mentally and physically as a couple, there is no agreement between the parties on the intention of marriage to establish a community of living. The agreement on the marriage to be established shall exist at the time of the report of marriage.

(2) We examine whether the plaintiff and the defendant did not have an agreement to marry at the time of the marriage report, and the fact that the plaintiff and the defendant had an intent to report marriage to meet the conditions for preferential supply of a long-term rental house for the old-term marriage unit to be used as the new marriage house at the time of the marriage report is recognized as above. According to the purport of the entire pleadings, the defendant cannot marry with the plaintiff as he was married after the completion of the marriage report in a passive response by the plaintiff's strong initiative.

It is recognized that there is no agreement on marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant at the time of reporting the marriage, but there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, in full view of the fact that the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to marry with the consent of their parents while making a teaching system, and the date of marriage was set, the reservation and the date of marriage was completed, and the purpose of the preferential supply of long-term leased house was to prepare a house to be used as a long-term new marriage, the Plaintiff and the Defendant had the principal intent to establish a marital relationship at least at the time of the marriage report, and the intention to use the marriage report was mixed in a manner that satisfies the conditions of the preferential supply of long-term leased house. However, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant, under the lead of the Plaintiff, completed the marriage report by agreement, but the Defendant was merely the withdrawal of the intention of marriage by gambling in the wedding ceremony.

(3) In addition, there is a mutual agreement between the intention of marriage, which means the establishment of a matrimonial relationship, and the report of marriage is established upon the completion of the report of marriage, and the establishment of a marital relationship is not subject to the establishment of a de facto marital relationship. Thus, the marriage does not become retroactively null and void on the ground that the plaintiff and the defendant were unable to form a substance of marriage, such as living together with the withdrawal of the defendant's intention after the report of marriage, and thus, they did not have a marital relationship

(4) Therefore, the plaintiff's primary claim is without merit.

3. Judgment on the conjunctive claim

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff, although the defendant did not intend to marry with the plaintiff, had the plaintiff enticed the plaintiff as if he had the intention to marry, and had the plaintiff report the marriage of this case. Thus, the plaintiff asserts that the marriage of this case had grounds for revocation under Article 816 subparagraph 3 of the Civil Code and

B. Determination

The plaintiff's conjunctive claim is without merit, since there is no evidence to acknowledge that the defendant deceivings the plaintiff as alleged above.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, all of the plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims are without merit, and they are dismissed, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

The presiding judge shall hear the judge's seat

The effect of judge's species;

Judges Kim Hyun-jin