Responding to a Lawsuit Against the Adulterous Partner | Assisting the Client in Reducing the Damages Claim Amount by 60%

The attorney understood the client's case in a 🔗lawsuit against the adulterous partner as follows.

The non-party was the client's workplace superior.

From the time the client joined the company, the non-party continuously expressed interest in and pursued the client.

Because the client knew that the non-party was a married man, the client repeatedly refused his advances.

However, the non-party used his position as the client's direct superior to demand things such as coercive dates.

Because the client was a contract worker who could be dismissed at the non-party's discretion, the client had no choice but to comply with the non-party's demands.

The non-party's demands grew, and eventually the plaintiff, the non-party's wife, learned of the matter, which led to the 🔗damages lawsuit against the adulterous partner.

In a lawsuit against the adulterous partner, what is important is to accurately understand the reason for the lawsuit.

This is because an appropriate response strategy can be established only when the plaintiff's reason for the lawsuit is accurately understood.

Determining a response method suited to the situation with the help of an attorney can be helpful.

If the case is unfair, it can be helpful to argue innocence, and if the allegations are true, it can be helpful to highlight exaggerated or false content among the plaintiff's claims in order to reduce the consolation money as much as possible.

The plaintiff's complaint should be analyzed legally, and a plan for leniency that the court can accept should be established.

The attorney in charge argued the nature of the relationship in which the non-party was the client's direct superior.

The client is currently a contract worker at the non-party's company and would have to leave if the contract is not renewed.

The client is a single mother raising a three-year-old son alone, and losing the job would cause severe financial hardship.

The non-party was well aware of the client's circumstances from the time she joined the company and used his superior position within the workplace to continuously request courtship and dates from the client.

The attorney emphasized that the client had complied with the non-party's demands out of necessity, and argued that there was no intent regarding the affair.

The attorney in charge submitted evidence to prove that the client had complied with the non-party's demands out of necessity.

The client's text message records clearly contained the non-party's threats and the client's refusals.

The attorney in charge emphasized that, contrary to the plaintiff's claims, the client had complied with the non-party's demands out of necessity, and stressed that there was no intent regarding the affair.

The attorney in charge argued that the client was also a victim.

In her unstable position as a contract worker, the client could not refuse the demands of the non-party, who was her direct superior, in order to continue working.

The non-party used his position to coerce the client into meetings, and the client complied only out of necessity.

The attorney in charge argued that the client was also harmed by the non-party's abuse of authority in the workplace, and stressed that the plaintiff's claim for damages should be substantially reduced.