1. The Client's Crisis

The client met the opposing party in July 2022 through an acquaintance's introduction and began dating, and in September 2022, before two months had passed, they registered their marriage. However, as conflicts deepened during the marriage, the opposing party applied for divorce mediation in March 2024, and the mediation was concluded in April 2024, dissolving the marriage under law.

The problem arose after the divorce. The opposing party filed a lawsuit claiming that, although the client had been in a de facto marital relationship with another woman until just before the marriage, he concealed this and entered into the marriage by deceit, and sought annulment of the marriage and KRW 50 million in damages. He also alleged that the client lied about the number of prior divorces.

2. Key Issues

The complex issues to be resolved in this case were largely threefold. First, whether there was legal interest in seeking annulment after the marriage had already been dissolved by divorce mediation. Under Civil Act Article 824, the effect of annulment of marriage arises prospectively, so the question was whether there was any practical benefit in seeking annulment once the marriage had already ended through divorce. Second, whether, based only on the evidence presented by the opposing party (referring to another woman as "wife" in text messages, adding her as an additional driver on a car insurance policy, attending a class reunion together, etc.), it could be recognized that the client had been in a de facto marital relationship with another woman until just before the marriage. Third, whether the client had concealed the number of prior divorces also had to be disputed.

3. Strategy

Managing Attorneys Yoon Ji-sang and Noh Jong-eon, together with Attorney Shin Mari, devised a strategy that attacked both the procedural defect in the annulment claim and the lack of evidence supporting the damages claim.

First, they argued that there was no legal interest in the annulment claim. Unlike nullity of marriage, annulment does not retroactively invalidate the marriage; rather, its effect ceases prospectively. Therefore, they contended that seeking annulment when the marital relationship had already been dissolved through the April 2024 divorce mediation was logically inconsistent and lacked legal benefit.

Second, regarding the allegation of deceit based on a prior de facto marriage, they rebutted each piece of evidence presented by the opposing party. They explained that referring to another woman as "wife" to acquaintances was merely a convenient expression used because it was cumbersome to explain the working relationship in detail; that registering her as an additional driver on the car insurance was done because a designated driver was needed for work-related reasons and the deletion was simply delayed after the marriage; and that attending a class reunion together was insufficient to establish a de facto marital relationship. They consistently argued that dating and a de facto marital relationship are entirely different legal concepts, and that the opposing party's evidence might show a dating relationship but was insufficient to prove the existence of a de facto marital relationship marked by economic integration.

Third, as to the allegation that the client deceived the opposing party about the number of divorces, they demonstrated that the client had honestly disclosed from the early stage of the relationship that he had been divorced twice, and thus defeated that claim.

4. Outcome and Recovery

The Seongnam Branch of the Suwon Family Court accepted the arguments of Law Firm Jonjae in full in December 2024, dismissing the annulment claim for lack of legal interest and rejecting the damages claim for lack of evidence. The court held that, while the evidence suggested the client had dated another woman before the marriage, dating alone was insufficient to conclude that he had been in a de facto marital relationship, and there was insufficient evidence to find that the marriage was entered into by deceit on that basis. All litigation costs were ordered to be borne by the losing opposing party, and the client was able to fully escape the unjust annulment and damages claims.

Assigned Attorneys: Managing Attorney Yoon Ji-sang · Managing Attorney Noh Jong-eon · Attorney Shin Mari

This case has been partially anonymized within a scope that does not undermine the essence of the matter in order to preserve confidentiality.