Photo not related to article. [123RF]
Photo not related to article. [123RF]

A woman who ended a decade-long live-in relationship after discovering her partner had been paying for sex at a noraebang says she was stunned when he turned around and demanded a share of her assets.

The case was introduced Thursday on YTN Radio's "Jo In-seop's Legal Consultation." A, a nurse in her 30s, said she began dating B, a medical device sales representative she met at the same hospital, 10 years ago.

The two continued their relationship with marriage in mind, and two years ago moved in together at an apartment registered in A's name. "We never filed a marriage registration, but everyone around us knew us as a couple," she said.

About a year ago, B said he wanted to start his own business and set up a medical device distribution company some distance from their home.

After launching the business, he began coming home in the early hours of the morning after drinking, and there were days when he went completely out of contact.

A initially gave him the benefit of the doubt, assuming he was meeting people as part of getting a new business off the ground.

"But my suspicions kept growing, and when I looked into it, I found out my partner had been calling hostesses at a noraebang and paying for sex," she said. "I was completely shocked. I made up my mind to break up with him."

"But the nerve of him," she said. "When I told him it was over, he turned around and demanded a property split. He said he had been paying off my apartment loan every month and wanted his share."

She added that he had also filed a loan-repayment lawsuit against her, claiming that money he had given her over the years to help cover living expenses was in fact a loan. "I gave 10 years of my life to this person, dreamed of marrying him — and not only did he pay for sex, but the moment we broke up he sued me for money. The whole situation is absurd and deeply unfair," she said.

A asked whether her relationship could be recognized as a common-law marriage under Korean law, and whether she had any grounds to seek damages from him.

'Relationship likely qualifies as common-law marriage — damages also possible'

Attorney Kim Su-jin of Shinsegae Law said the circumstances strongly pointed to a common-law marriage. "They dated with marriage as the goal for about 10 years, lived together for the past two years, and both families were aware of the relationship," she said. "Taking all of this together, there appears to be both a subjective mutual intent to marry and an objective marital reality — a shared life as a couple — so the relationship is likely to be recognized as a common-law marriage."

Kim said B's property-split claim was not without legal basis, however. "The provisions on the right to claim property division apply by analogy here. Although the apartment is in A's name, if the other party has been making the monthly loan payments, his contribution to building up that real estate asset can be assessed," she said. "Courts determine the amount and method of property division by considering the total assets built through the cooperation of both parties and other circumstances, so there is a possibility that his contribution through loan payments will be factored into the calculation."

Kim added that A had strong grounds to seek damages in return. "When a common-law marriage is recognized, a party who breaks it off without just cause is liable for damages arising from an unlawful act," she said. "In this case, the other party engaged in misconduct including paying for sex, which led to the breakdown of the relationship. That constitutes misconduct that does not qualify as just cause for dissolving a common-law marriage, and the fault can be attributed to him."

In short, "A can seek damages including consolation money from the other party," Kim added.

Kim also addressed B's loan-repayment lawsuit. "Court precedent tends to treat money exchanged between parties in a common-law marriage as a gift rather than a loan, absent a written loan agreement or an agreement on interest," she said. "If the other party wants to argue it was a loan, he must submit evidence demonstrating an intent to lend — such as a written IOU, records of interest payments, or proof that repayment was demanded. In common-law relationships where such evidence is absent, courts tend not to recognize loan-repayment claims."


yul@heraldcorp.com