[Chatting] I'm dating my boyfriend who I met at a dolsing meeting, but suddenly a woman taking a picture... "It's my husband."

□ Broadcast date and time: October 28, 2024 (Monday)
□ Host: Attorney Jo In-seop
□ Starter: Attorney Lee Jun-heon

* The text below may differ from the actual broadcast content, so please check the broadcast for more accurate information.

□ DEAR READER: I was divorced from my husband and was living alone. My friend recommended a dolsing meeting because she felt sorry for me staying alone. The first day of the meeting... I met a man, and after going to meetings a few more times, I found out we had a crush on each other, so I started dating. My boyfriend used to work for a construction company, but he often went on business trips, so he usually only dated on weekends. We got closer as time went by. In particular, sharing the pain of divorce became deeper, and the story of remarriage came out. And then the incident happened. I went to a restaurant with my boyfriend on the weekend and suddenly a woman approached me and took a picture while crying. She says she's her boyfriend's wife. I was so surprised. I was tricked by my boyfriend. The man's wife said she would do it by law, but she was so scared. I promised that I would never see my boyfriend again. A month after that... My boyfriend sent me a long text message. He said he was just saying he was going to divorce his wife. He said he had no intention of cheating, but he told me to keep seeing him because he's getting divorced soon. The long article ended with saying I love you. It shakes my heart when I see it. Can I trust him again?

◇ Lawyer Cho In-seop (hereinafter referred to as Cho In-seop): The man who thought he was a dolsing, turned out to be a married man. I think you've seen the man's wife and found out everything, but you haven't been able to organize your mind.

◆ Lawyer Lee Jun-heon (hereinafter referred to as Lee Jun-heon): I think I'm shaken to hear that a man is going to divorce.

◇ Jo In-seop: I don't think you knew your boyfriend was still not divorcing, but is he liable for alimony in this case as well?

◆ Lee Jun-heon: In this case, the alimony liability may not be recognized. The basis for holding accountable for cheating is Article 750 of the Civil Code. Article 750 of the Civil Code stipulates that there must be intention or negligence of the actor in order to be liable for illegal activities. In other words, even if you knew or didn't know that your boyfriend wasn't divorced, you must be negligent in not knowing so that you can be liable for alimony. However, in this case, there is a possibility that you may not be liable for alimony because you did not know that your boyfriend was not divorced, and there is no circumstance that you could have fully known that he was not divorced.

◇ Cho In-seop: How can you prove that you didn't know, you didn't know?

◆ Lee Jun-heon: In fact, the fact that you knew or fully understood is a matter that your boyfriend's wife must prove. I think it would be good to actively argue with the sender by submitting a rebuttal. First of all, he says he met his boyfriend at a dolsinging party, but anyone who comes out at a dolsinging party would think he's divorced enough. So I think you'd better have evidence to confirm that you met your boyfriend at a dolsing meeting. And it would be better to actively claim that there were always pictures taken alone on your boyfriend's Kakao Talk profile or that you couldn't know if your boyfriend was married with the pictures set in the profile you can see because Kakao Talk profiles are multi-profile these days, and to secure and submit evidence.

◇ Jo In-seop: You said you're shaking your heart right now, but can I keep seeing you if I pay alimony even if I'm admitted to being responsible for illegal activities?

◆ Lee Jun-heon: Even if you are responsible for illegal activities, and you pay alimony according to the judgment, you may have to pay alimony again if you continue to meet. This is because the alimony you paid this time is alimony for cheating before the judgment, and if you continue to meet after the judgment, the act becomes a new illegal act. And if you keep seeing each other, it's hard to claim that you didn't know this time, and it's very negative to you that you've already been responsible once, but you've cheated again. So even if you don't meet your boyfriend for a long time after paying alimony, you may be sentenced to a similar amount to the first alimony, or in some cases, more alimony may be sentenced.

◇ Jo In-seop: Speaking of remarriage, I have sex with my boyfriend, can I take this as a problem with him?

◆ Lee Jun-heon: Unfortunately, it seems difficult to take issue with this part. Since it has been about 15 years since the crime of adultery was eliminated, I think you all know that the crime of adultery cannot be punished. Sometimes people ask if fraud is established in this case, but fraud is established when property is delivered or property profits are taken due to deception. In this case, the issue will be whether sex can be viewed as the issuance of wealth or property interests, and many scholars believe that while there are no other crimes (bribery) to view sexual activity as property gains, it is difficult to see that property and property interests also include sexual activity. Based on this view, it seems difficult to punish him for fraud at this time.

◇ Jo In-seop: Now, to summarize what we've done so far... If you didn't know your boyfriend wasn't divorced, chances are you won't be liable for alimony. It's important to establish that you didn't know you were a married man through the photos you took alone on your Kakaotalk profile and that you and your boyfriend met at a dolsing meeting. If you continue to see your boyfriend after paying alimony, it will be considered a new illegal act and you may pay extra alimony. It seems difficult to take issue with sex with your boyfriend and punish him for fraud. You've been with lawyer Lee Jun-hun.

◆ Thank you.

◇ Cho In-seop: You can listen to <Attorney Cho In-seop's Counseling Office> again on YouTube. If you have any questions or suggestions, please comment.