[Daejeon Divorce Attorney Favorable Judgment Case] Daejeon Divorce Attorney Establishes the Gravity of the Affair Partner's Tort and Recovers the Full Amount of the Consolation Money Claimed

In the consultation with the Daejeon divorce attorney, the client explained that a video of sexual relations between the affair partner and the spouse existed and that the client had confirmed it directly.

The client suffered an even greater shock upon learning that the affair partner was an employee working at the client's store.

The Daejeon divorce attorney quickly identified the key issues in this case and established a strategy regarding the calculation of the consolation money amount, the direction of the argument, and other matters.

The Daejeon divorce attorney emphasizes that there are many factors to consider when pursuing a claim for damages against an affair partner.

In particular, the extinctive prescription, the conditions for claiming consolation money, and other matters must be examined closely. These are as follows.

Extinctive Prescription for Damages Against an Affair Partner

Civil Act Article 766 (Extinctive Prescription of the Right to Claim Damages) (1) The right to claim damages arising from a tort shall lapse by prescription if the victim or the victim's legal representative does not exercise it within three years from the date on which the victim becomes aware of both the damage and the person who caused it.
(2) The same shall apply where 10 years have elapsed from the date on which the tort was committed.

※ Note ※

A tort claim for damages for an affair is recognized where the affair partner met with the other party while knowing that the other party was married.

Seoul Southern District Court, Judgment 2015Gadan42746

According to the precedent, the calculation of the amount of damages for an affair takes into account the circumstances of the affair, the content and degree of the affair, the duration of the affair, the situation after the affair was discovered, the duration of the marriage, the existence of children, and other circumstances.

The Daejeon divorce attorney emphasized that the duration of the plaintiff's marriage was not short and that the plaintiff had minor children, and requested that the court grant the claim in this case.

Citing objective evidence (such as records of hospital treatment), the Daejeon divorce attorney set the consolation money amount on the basis that the degree of harm to the plaintiff was severe.

On this basis, the attorney also argued that the full amount of the consolation money claimed should be granted.