家庭婚姻纠纷典型案例(河南）

目录

1.王某辉诉柴某探望权纠纷案

2.付某桐诉付某强抚养费纠纷案

3.余某诉余某望抚养费纠纷案

4.冯某刚、周某诉冯某伟解除收养关系案

5.贾某诉刘某赡养纠纷案

6.陈某真诉陈某领、陈某霞赡养纠纷案

7.岳某诉曹某离婚纠纷案

8.张某诉陈某离婚后财产纠纷案

9.邵某诉薛某离婚纠纷案

10.周某诉张某离婚后损害责任纠纷案

一、王某辉诉柴某探望权纠纷案

——莫让孩子受到再一次的伤害

（一）基本案情

原告王某辉与被告柴某经人介绍相识后于2012年10月6日按照农村习俗举行典礼仪式后开始同居生活，2013年9月12日生育女儿王某瑶，后双方解除同居关系。王某辉与柴某曾因非婚生女王某瑶的抚养权纠纷诉至法院，2015年6月2日，鹤壁市浚县人民法院判决非婚生女王某瑶暂随原告柴某生活，待其成年后随父随母由其自择。2015年7月20日，原告王某辉因探望权纠纷到法院起诉。

（二）裁判结果

浚县人民法院认为，本案中原被告的非婚生女儿王某瑶与被告共同生活，原告作为父亲，有权探望王某瑶。现双方对原告探望权的具体时间和方式有不同意见，法院本着既要考虑不影响子女的正常生活，又要增加女儿同父亲的沟通交流、减轻子女因父母解除同居关系而带来的家庭破碎感以及既有利于子女今后身心健康成长，又能维护原告合法权利的原则，依照《中华人民共和国婚姻法》第三十八条第一款、第二款的规定，判决原告王某辉自判决生效之日起，可于每月第一周周日上午9时至下午17时探望女儿王某瑶一次，被告柴某应予以协助。

（三）典型意义

探望权是基于父母子女身份关系不直接抚养方享有的与未成年子女探望、联系、会面、交往、短期共同生活的法定权利。离婚后不直接抚养子女方探视子女产生纠纷的原因较多，问题很复杂,其产生的根源往往是由于双方“草率”离婚时对处理子女抚养及对方探望子女考虑不周，以致于产生矛盾隔阂。我国婚姻法对探望权的规定比较原则，仅有一条“离婚后，不直接抚养子女的父或母，有探望子女的权利，另一方有协助的义务。行使探望权利的方式、时间由当事人协议；协议不成时，由人民法院判决。”此类案件在审理时，法院在确定探望的时间和方式上，应从有利于子女的身心健康、且不影响子女的正常生活和学习的角度考虑，探望的方式亦应灵活多样，简便易行，具有可操作性，便于当事人行使权利和法院的有效执行。

二、付某桐诉付某强抚养费纠纷案

——婚姻存续期间能否要求一方支付抚养费

（一）基本案情

原告付某桐的母亲韩某与被告付某强于2012年12月7日结婚，于2013年9月18日生育一子付某桐。韩某住院生育原告付某桐的医疗费用由被告付某强支付。自原告付某桐出生后，其母亲韩某即带其离开单独居住至今，被告付某强亦未支付过原告付某桐抚养费。被告付某强现无固定收入。原告诉至法院，要求被告每月支付抚养费。

（二）裁判结果

郑州市惠济区人民法院认为，父母对子女有抚养教育的义务。婚姻关系存续期间，父母双方或者一方拒不履行抚养子女义务，未成年或者不能独立生活的子女请求支付抚养费的，人民法院应予支持。本案中，原告出生后，原告母亲即与被告分开居住，原告母亲带原告单独生活，被告未支付过原告的抚养费，故原告要求被告支付抚养费的请求，符合法律规定，遂判决被告付某强于判决生效后十日内按照每月人民币400元的标准一次性支付原告付某桐自2013年10月份至判决生效之日的抚养费；被告付某强于判决生效后按每月人民币400元的标准支付原告付某桐的抚养费至其满十八周岁；驳回原告付某桐过高部分的诉讼请求。

（三）典型意义

未成年子女要求支付抚养费，基本上都是在夫妻双方离婚时或离婚后才产生的，而在婚姻存续期间，由于夫妻双方财产为共有财产，是否能要求不尽抚养义务的一方支付抚养费，这是本案争议的要点。在《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国婚姻法〉若干问题的解释（三）》出台之前，对此一直存在争议。而《婚姻法》解释（三）第三条则对此作出了明确规定：婚姻关系存续期间，父母双方或者一方拒不履行抚养子女义务，未成年或者不能独立生活的子女请求支付抚养费的，人民法院应予支持。抚养子女是父母应尽的法定义务，不管是婚内还是婚外、婚生子女抑或非婚生子女，父母的抚养义务是不变的，只要一方不履行该抚养义务，未成年子女有权利向其主张抚养费。同时，在子女抚育费数额的具体确定上，还要根据子女正常生活的实际需要，应能维持其衣、食、住、行、学、医的正常需求，并需要综合考虑父母双方的经济收入、费用支出、现有生活负担、履行义务的可能性和社会地位等因素，最终做出公平合理的判决。

三、余某诉余某望抚养费纠纷案

——抚养费标准是否能随物价上涨而提高？

（一）基本案情

原告余某的母亲和父亲2008年经调解离婚，双方达成调解协议，余某由母亲抚养，其父亲余某望当庭一次性给付抚养费23000元。2013年余某在某双语实验学校上小学二年级，年学费3600元，其母亲无固定收入，主要收入来源为打工。后余某诉至法院请求其父余某望每月给付抚养费1000元，到2023年6月30日其满18岁止。

（二）裁判结果

根据《中华人民共和国婚姻法》第三十七条规定，关于子女生活费和教育费的协议或判决，不妨碍子女在必要时向父母任何一方提出超过协议或判决原定的数额的合理要求。最高人民法院《关于人民法院审理离婚案件处理子女抚养费问题的若干具体意见》第十八条规定，原定抚育费数额不足以维持当地实际生活水平的，子女可以要求增加抚育费。本案中原告余某父母离婚时间是2008年，当时双方协议余某父亲当庭一次性给子女付抚养费23000元，平均每月62.5元。而2012年度河南省农村居民人均生活消费支出为5032.14元，平均每月419元。根据上述情况，余某父亲原来给付的抚养费目前显然不足以维持当地实际生活水平，因此驻马店市确山县人民法院判决支持了原告余某要求增加抚养费的请求。

（三）典型意义

世界许多国家和地区的婚姻家庭法立法时都遵循“儿童利益优先原则”和“儿童最大利益原则”，目前，我国的《婚姻法》和《未成年人保护法》也明确规定了保护妇女、儿童合法权益的原则。“未成年人利益优先原则”和“未成年人最大利益原则”应当成为我国婚姻家事立法的基本原则，尽可能预防和减少由于父母的离婚，给未成年子女带来的生活环境上的影响及未成年子女性格养成、思想变化、学习成长等不利因素。

在婚姻家庭类案件中,人民法院在对未成年子女的抚养费进行判决、调解时,抚养费标准一般是依据当时当地的社会平均生活水平而确定。但随着经济的发展，生活水平的提高及物价上涨等因素,法院原先所判决、调解的抚养费的基础已经不存在或发生很大改变，再依据当时的条件和标准支付抚养费，已经不能满足未成年人基本的生活要求，不能保障未成年子女正常的生活和学习。因此,法律和司法解释规定未成年子女有权基于法定情形，向抚养义务人要求增加抚养费。本案正是基于最大限度保障未成年子女利益的考量，在原审调解书已经发生法律效力的情况下，准予未成年子女余某向人民法院提起新的诉讼，依法支持其请求其父增加抚养费的主张。该判决契合了我们中华民族尊老爱幼的传统家庭美德教育，符合社会主义核心价值观的要求。

四、冯某刚、周某诉冯某伟解除收养关系案

——《收养法》实施前的收养行为如何认定？

（一）基本案情

1987年11月份，原告冯某刚骑三轮车出门卖菜，在村北河沟边捡到一名刚出生的弃婴，遂将其抱回家中抚养，原告冯某刚与妻子张某在1987年11月27日为该弃婴申报了户口，登记在二人户籍名下，关系为“长子”，取名冯某伟。一晃20年过去了，被告冯某伟在二原告抚育下长大成人，并在原告夫妇帮助下结婚育孩。然而，被告婚后一改往态，不仅不对年老体衰的原告夫妇尽赡养扶助义务，更纵容妻子打骂原告，引起了乡里乡亲的公愤，致使二原告身心受损，长期生活在外，不敢回家。无奈之下，老两口到法院起诉，要求解除与被告的收养关系，并支付生活费、教育费补偿金。

（二）裁判结果

郑州市惠济区人民法院认为，本案的两位原告收养被告发生在1987年，即在1992年4月1日《中华人民共和国收养法》施行之前，虽然原告事后并未办理合法手续，但鉴于原告已抚养被告长达20多年，且有村委会出具的证明和邻居、亲友公认二原告与被告系养父母子女关系的证言，理应按照收养关系来对待。被告冯某伟在成年成家后，未能正确处理家庭关系，纵容其妻打骂原告夫妇，经过当地村委会及家族长辈调解仍然未果，导致二原告与被告关系恶化，无法共同生活。原告夫妇含辛茹苦把作为养子的被告抚育长大，而被告却不善待已经年迈的二原告，更给他们的身心造成伤害，法院本着尊重原告诉求、维护老人合法权益的考虑，对原告提出的诉讼请求予以支持，依据《中华人民共和国收养法》第二十七条、第三十条，《最高人民法院关于贯彻民事政策法律若干问题的意见》第28条、第31条之规定，判决解除原告冯某刚、张某与被告冯某伟的收养关系；被告冯某伟于判决生效后一个月内支付原告冯某刚、张某生活费和教育费补偿金20万元。

（三）典型意义

赡养老人是中华民族的传统美德，更是子女对父母应尽的义务，无论是亲生子女，还是养子女，均不得以任何理由推脱责任。本案原告夫妇收养被告的时间在1987年，虽然未按法律规定办理任何收养手续，但法院裁判时应充分考虑到原告夫妇的文化水平和邻里乡亲的证言，如果仅因原告未能办理收养手续便否定收养关系，不但会让群众不信服，也不利于保护做出善行的原告夫妇。被告冯某伟作为原告夫妇在河边捡回的弃婴，能够健康成长并结婚育子，完全受原告夫妇养育恩赐，原告夫妇含辛茹苦供养子上学接受教育，为其操办婚姻，帮其照顾孩子，但被告及其妻子的种种行为，不仅伤害了原告夫妇的感情与合法权益，更在社会上造成了不良影响，法院的公正裁判不仅是对忘恩负义行为的惩戒，更是民意所向。

五、贾某诉刘某赡养纠纷案

——用法律来纠偏“久病床前无孝子”

（一）基本案情

原告贾某76岁，年事已高，体弱多病，且生活不能自理。2012年至2013年间，贾某因病住院仅治疗费就花了30多万元。贾某一生生育四子三女，其中三个儿子和三个女儿都比较孝顺，但三子刘某多年来未尽任何赡养义务。贾某某住医院期间，三个儿子和三个女儿都积极筹钱，一起分担医疗费。而三子刘某不仅对母亲病情不管不问，还不愿分担任何医疗费用。虽经村干部多次调解，但刘某均躲避不见。贾某无奈之下，走上法庭提起诉讼，请求判令其子刘某支付赡养费、承担已花去的医疗费，并分摊以后每年的医疗和护理费用。

（二）裁判结果

商丘市虞城县人民法院公开开庭审理了本案，并依照《中华人民共和国婚姻法》第二十一条第三款“子女不履行赡养义务时，无劳动能力的或生活困难的父母，有要求子女付给赡养费的权利。”、《中华人民共和国老年人权益保障法》第十四条“赡养人应当履行对老年人经济上供养、生活上照料和精神上慰藉的义务，照顾老年人的特殊需要。赡养人是指老年人的子女以及其他依法负有赡养义务的人。赡养人的配偶应当协助赡养人履行赡养义务。”、第十五条第一款“赡养人应当使患病的老年人及时得到治疗和护理；对经济困难的老年人，应当提供医疗费用。”、第十九条第二款“赡养人不履行赡养义务，老年人有要求赡养人付给赡养费等权利。”的规定，判决支持贾某的诉讼请求。

（三）典型意义

赡养老人是回报养育之恩是中华民族的传统美德，更是子女对父母应尽的法定义务。子女不仅要赡养父母，而且要尊敬父母，关心父母，在家庭生活中的各方面给予积极扶助。不得以放弃继承权或者其他理由，拒绝履行赡养义务。子女不履行赡养义务，父母有要求子女付给赡养费、医疗费的权利。当父母年老、体弱、病残时，子女更应妥善加以照顾，使他们在感情上、精神上得到慰藉，安度晚年。本案的被告刘某作为原告七个子女中的赡养义务人之一，无论从道义上、伦理上还是从法律上都应对母亲履行赡养义务，在老母亲年老体弱且患有疾病的情况下，被告应当与其他兄弟姊妹一起共同承担赡养义务，使老母亲能够安度晚年、幸福生活，而被告有能力履行赡养义务却三番五次推诿履行，并公开放言不管不顾老母亲，在当地造成恶劣影响，引起民愤。法院在确认双方关系和事实前提下，依法判令被告履行赡养义务，彰显了法治权威，同时也维护了道德风尚。

六、陈某真诉陈某领、陈某霞赡养纠纷案

——用巡回审判铸造“孝道红黑榜”

（一）基本案情

2015年5月14日,原告陈某真将儿子陈某领、女儿陈某霞告上法庭，诉称女儿陈某霞对其尽了赡养义务，但儿子陈某领不但不尽赡养义务，而且还将其拆迁补偿款和2.9亩承包地据为已有，更经常无故殴打原告。为此，原告陈某真将儿子陈某领、女儿陈某霞诉至法院，请求判令被告陈某领每月支付赡养费1000元，并归还原告的2.9亩承包地和1.8万元现金。

（二）裁判结果

商丘市睢阳区人民法院认为，被告作为原告儿子，对原告有法定的赡养义务，对该纠纷的产生应负全部责任。原告要求被告返还其房屋的拆迁补偿款18000元和对被告陈某领给付赡养费的诉讼请求应予以部分支持；综合考虑被告陈某真家庭生活状况和2015年河南省城镇居民人均消费支出标准，被告陈某领给付原告赡养费每月360元为宜因。原告已丧失劳动能力，原告名下的2.9亩承包地，被告陈某领有义务耕种，但收益应有原告的份额。因原告现在女儿陈某霞处居住，被告陈某霞已尽赡养义务，且原告已明确表示对女儿陈某霞撤回起诉。据此，依据《中华人民共和国老年人权益保护法》第十三条、十四条、十五条、十七条、十八条、二十二条第一款，《中华人民共和国婚姻法》第二十一条第三款、《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》第六十四条的规定，判决被告陈某领于判决生效后十日内支付原告陈某真自2015年5月份（含5月份）开始以后的每月的赡养费360元，该款于每月的第1日支付；被告陈某领于判决生效后十日内返还原告陈某真的房屋拆迁款补偿款18000元。该案经在陈某领所在村巡回审判，陈某领当庭向父亲陈某真忏悔道歉，并跪求父亲原谅。该判决现已生效履行。

（三）典型意义

乌鸦有反哺之义，羊羔有跪乳之恩。百善孝为先，子女赡养父母是中华民族的传统美德，也是法律的明确规定。家庭是社会的细胞，家庭不和谐，社会和谐便成了无本之木。本案被告陈某领不但不赡养年迈的父亲，而且还抢钱霸地，施以暴力，其不孝行为与中华民族良好的道德传统背道而驰，格格不入。

商丘市睢阳区人民法院受案后，认为这是一件“审理一案、教育一片” 的典型案例，遂在原被告所在村提前张贴开庭公告，以巡回审判的方式审理此案。庭审中，法官的教育、旁听群众的议论、父亲的控诉指责，形成了一股不可辩驳的正能量，迫使被告陈某领当庭承认自己的错误做法，跪求父亲原谅，并保证认真履行法院判决义务。人民法院通过巡回审判的方式，公开对维护老年人合法权益进行审理，结合社会舆论打造“孝道红黑榜”，不失为审判机关在培树社会主义核心价值道路上的一种探索形式。

七、岳某诉曹某离婚纠纷案

——公平原则在离婚案件中的彰显

（一）基本案情

岳某与曹某经人介绍于1999年登记结婚。婚后育有二子。婚后双方常因家庭琐事发生争吵，夫妻感情破裂。岳某要求与曹某离婚，曹某认可夫妻感情破裂，同意离婚。双方就子女抚养和部分共同财产的分配达成了一致意见。经调查，曹某系农村家庭主妇，平日里下地干活、照顾一家老小，但没有工作及固定的经济收入。

（二）裁判结果

鹤壁市淇滨区法院和中级人民法院经审理认为，岳某与曹某感情破裂，应准许离婚。曹某作为家庭妇女，对家庭付出较多，没有固定收入来源，离婚后将导致生活困难，根据婚姻法有关规定，判决岳某给付曹某经济帮助两万元。

（三）典型意义

在婚姻关系中，女方往往处于弱势地位。一方面她们出于照顾家庭的考虑，往往以牺牲自己的工作甚至事业为代价；另一方面，在出现婚姻纠纷时，女方往往由于没有为家庭带来直接经济收入导致其合法权益得不到保障。在审理此类案件时，要充分查明案件事实，对于确实对家庭付出较多义务的女方应判决给予一定的经济帮助，使其合法权益能够得到保障。本案中，考虑到曹某在夫妻共同生活期间，抚育子女、照顾老人，付出较多，对家庭做出了较大的贡献；离婚后没有固定的经济收入，还要抚养孩子，经济压力比较大，因此判决岳某给付曹某经济帮助两万元。

八、张某诉陈某离婚后财产纠纷案

——莫把婚姻当作获利工具

（一）基本案情

2011年农历六月，张某和陈某经人介绍订婚，因张某所在生产组要分土地补偿款，张家为使家庭迅速“添丁进口”多得补偿，张某和陈某在交往不到一个月的情况下即登记结婚。婚后不到三天，张某继续到外地上学，陈某在张家仅住了几个月就回其娘家居住。其后，陈某因向张某索要生产组每人发放的土地补偿58700元而多次发生争执。2013年，张某以夫妻相处时间较短，双方无感情基础为由两次到法院起诉离婚。在和好无望的情况下，襄城县人民法院于2014年6月以夫妻感情确已破裂为由判决二人离婚。离婚后，陈某要求张某父母返还自己的土地补偿款58700元，张某父母以办理结婚、待客、买家具钱已经花完的理由拒不交出。多次索要无果后，陈某以不当得利为由将张某父母再次诉讼至法院。

(二)裁判结果

襄城县人民法院和许昌市中级人民法院经审理认为，土地补偿款是陈某基于合法婚姻关系而取得的按份共有财产，陈某对其份额享有所有权。对于张某父母辩称的该款全部用于办理结婚、待客、买家具的理由不予认可，支持了陈某的诉讼请求,判决张某父母偿还陈某的土地补偿款58700元。

（三）典型意义

伴随着城镇化飞速发展的步伐，围绕农村土地的各种纠纷也出现上升趋势。如本案中的情况，张某一家把获取土地补偿款等利益作为结婚的主要考量因素和目的，这样的仓促婚姻往往因缺乏感情基础而极不稳固，对个人、家庭和社会也都是极度不负责的做法，更存在着法律和财产上的风险。金钱买不来爱情，也锁不住婚姻，终身大事还是谨慎为好。

九、邵某诉薛某离婚纠纷案

——“网恋”时代，更应惜缘

（一）基本案情

2012年，80后青年邵某与薛某在一次网络聊天时结识，二人通过网络进行了长期的交流，逐渐开始约会见面，经过一年多的相知、相爱，终于在2013年9月正式结婚。婚后二人感情尚好，在第二年生育了一个孩子，然而双方之间的问题从此开始产生。由于生活习惯不同，加上当初网络交流时，彼此对对方家庭成员和性格特点了解并不深入，作为妻子的薛某在婚后与同来家中照顾宝宝的公婆产生了矛盾，邵某与薛某也因此经常吵架拌嘴。在一次争吵过程中，薛某终于无法忍受，与公婆动了手。无奈之下，丈夫邵某在2015年4月以夫妻感情已破裂为由起诉离婚。

（二）裁判结果

郑州市惠济区人民法院经审理认为：双方因产生一些家庭琐事就轻易提起离婚，着实不太严肃。家庭内部有摩擦在所难免，加上原被告是网恋而成的婚事，因此，彼此仍有进一步了解缓和的希望。成就一次完美的婚姻需要男女双方共同理解忍让，本案原被告仍有希望将婚姻关系修复重好，双方感情实际上并未完全破裂，因此判决驳回诉讼请求。原被告经法官判后释法，均未上诉。

（三）典型意义

近年来，随着信息技术和交通事业的飞速发展，“网恋”、“闪婚”已不再罕见，“千里之外”的异地恋也逐渐盛行，但随之而来的大量离婚纠纷，尤其是子女出生后产生家庭矛盾而引发婚姻矛盾的案件呈上升趋势。年轻人本身感情经历少，心气过重，对待婚姻关系不太严肃，稍有矛盾就诉诸离婚并不是明智之举，法院在审理时亦应当以引导当事人互相谅解、共同维护婚姻关系，不应轻易判决年轻夫妻离婚，而更应注意给闹矛盾的双方留下缓冲和解的空间。法院判决不离婚时亦在强调夫妻双方在婚姻中要注重多沟通和磨合，增强责任意识，在面临冲突时多相互体谅和宽容。同时，也要引导上一辈老人注意不可过多干涉子女的婚姻生活，应摆正自己的位置，多放手让子女自行处理婚姻中的问题，为维护子女小家庭的和谐努力。

十、周某诉张某离婚后损害责任纠纷案

——是否可请求出轨者支付精神赔偿？

（一）基本案情

2003年原告周某与被告张某登记结婚，婚后生育一女一子。2013年7月，张某提起与周某离婚之诉，经法院主持调解离婚，调解书，主要内容为，双方自愿离婚，张某一次性给付周某某人民币38000元，双方互不再追究。而2013年5月，张某与案外某女生育一女。周某诉称离婚后才发现此事，现起诉要求张某赔偿精神损害赔偿金3万元。

（二）裁判结果

河南省滑县人民法院经审理认为，依据《中华人民共和国婚姻法》第四条规定：“夫妻应当互相忠实，互相尊重；家庭成员间应当敬老爱幼，互相帮助，维护平等、和睦、文明的婚姻家庭关系”、第四十六条规定，导致离婚的，无过错方有权请求损害赔偿；最高人民法院《关于适用<中华人民共和国婚姻法若干问题的解释》第二十八条婚姻法第四十六条规定的“损害赔偿”，包括物质损害赔偿和精神损害赔偿。被告张某在与原告婚姻关系存续期间，与他人有不正当男女关系的行为，并生育一女，导致离婚，应该承担相应的民事赔偿责任，应当支持原告提出损害赔偿请求，即判令被告张某给付原告周某精神损害赔偿人民币15000元。宣判后，双方均未提出上诉。

（三）典型意义

夫妻互相忠实，不背叛爱情，不仅是传统美德，也是法定义务。对婚姻不忠实，是难以容忍的不诚信，它不仅破坏了夫妻关系，拆散了家庭，也伤及无辜的子女，而且败坏了社会风气，是法律所禁止的行为。因此，在离婚后发现被告的婚姻存续期间的出轨行为，请求精神损害赔偿，人民法院依法予以支持，以彰显法律的公正和道德力量。

Typical Cases of Family and Marriage Disputes (Henan)

catalogue

1. Wang Mouhui v. Chai Mou's Visitation Right Dispute Case

2. Dispute case of Fu Moutong suing Fu Mouqiang for alimony

3. Dispute case of Yu Mouwang's alimony

4. Feng Mougang and Zhou Mouwei v. Feng Mouwei for Termination of Adoption Relationship

5. Jia v. Liu's Maintenance Dispute Case

6. Case of Chen Mouzhen v. Chen Mouling and Chen Mouxia in Support Dispute

7. Yue v. Cao Divorce Dispute Case

8. Property dispute case after divorce between Zhang and Chen

9. Case of divorce dispute between Shao and Xue

10. Dispute over Liability for Damage after Zhou v. Zhang's Divorce

1、 Wang Mouhui v. Chai Mou's Visitation Right Dispute Case

——Don't let the child be harmed again

（1） Basic facts of the case

The plaintiff Wang Mouhui and the defendant Chai Mouhui met through an introduction and began living together on October 6, 2012, following a ceremony held in accordance with rural customs. On September 12, 2013, they gave birth to their daughter Wang Mouyao, and later both parties terminated their cohabitation relationship. Wang Mouhui and Chai Mou once filed a lawsuit to the court over the custody dispute of the illegitimate queen Mou Yao. On June 2, 2015, the People's Court of Junxian County, Hebi City ruled that the illegitimate queen Mou Yao would temporarily live with the plaintiff Chai Mou and would choose to accompany her father and mother when she reached adulthood. On July 20, 2015, the plaintiff Wang Mouhui filed a lawsuit in court due to a dispute over visitation rights.

（2） Judgment results

The People's Court of Junxian County believes that in this case, Wang Mouyao, the illegitimate daughter of the Central Plains defendant, lives together with the defendant, and the plaintiff, as the father, has the right to visit Wang Mouyao. Both parties have different opinions on the specific time and method of the plaintiff's right to visit. The court, based on the principle of not affecting the normal life of the children, but also increasing communication and exchange between the daughter and the father, reducing the sense of family fragmentation caused by the parents' termination of cohabitation, and promoting the children's physical and mental health and growth in the future while safeguarding the plaintiff's legitimate rights, in accordance with Article 38 (1) of the Marriage Law of the People's Republic of China According to the provisions of the second paragraph, from the effective date of the judgment, the plaintiff Wang Mouhui may visit his daughter Wang Mouyao once on the first Sunday of each month from 9am to 17pm, and the defendant Chai shall provide assistance.

（3） Typical significance

The right of visitation is a legal right enjoyed by parents and children who do not directly support them to visit, contact, meet, interact, and live together for a short period of time with underage children. There are many reasons for disputes arising from not directly raising children and visiting them after divorce, and the problems are very complex. The root cause of these disputes is often due to both parties' hasty consideration of handling child rearing and the other party's visit to children during divorce, resulting in conflicts and barriers. The provisions of China's Marriage Law on the right to visit are relatively principled, with only one provision: "After divorce, parents who do not directly support their children have the right to visit their children, and the other party has the obligation to assist. The way and time to exercise the right to visit are agreed upon by the parties; if an agreement cannot be reached, the people's court shall make a judgment." In such cases, when determining the time and method of visit, the court should be conducive to the physical and mental health of the children From the perspective of not affecting the normal life and learning of children, the methods of visitation should also be flexible, diverse, simple, and operable, facilitating the exercise of rights by the parties and effective enforcement by the court.

2、 Dispute case of Fu Moutong suing Fu Mouqiang for alimony

——Can one party be required to pay alimony during the marriage period

（1） Basic facts of the case

The plaintiff Fu Moutong's mother, Han, married the defendant Fu Mouqiang on December 7, 2012 and gave birth to a son Fu Moutong on September 18, 2013. The medical expenses paid by the plaintiff for Han's hospitalization and childbirth will be paid by the defendant Fu Mouqiang. Since the birth of the plaintiff Fu Moutong, his mother Han has taken him away from living alone. The defendant Fu Mouqiang has not paid the plaintiff's support for Fu Moutong. The defendant paid a certain amount of cash without fixed income. The plaintiff informed the court and requested the defendant to pay monthly maintenance fees.

（2） Judgment results

The People's Court of Huiji District, Zhengzhou City believes that parents have the obligation to raise and educate their children. During the period of marriage, if both or one of the parents refuses to fulfill their obligation to raise their children, or if a minor or child who is unable to live independently requests payment of maintenance fees, the people's court shall support it. In this case, after the plaintiff was born, the plaintiff's mother lived separately from the defendant. The plaintiff's mother led the plaintiff to live alone, and the defendant had not paid the plaintiff's maintenance fees. Therefore, the plaintiff's request for the defendant to pay maintenance fees met the legal requirements. Therefore, the defendant was ordered to pay a lump sum of RMB 400 per month to the plaintiff within ten days after the judgment came into effect, starting from October 2013 to the date of the judgment; The defendant, Fu Mouqiang, shall pay the plaintiff a monthly maintenance fee of RMB 400 after the judgment takes effect, until he reaches the age of 18; Reject the plaintiff's claim to pay a disproportionate amount of money.

（3） Typical significance

The demand for alimony from underage children is generally only generated during or after the divorce of both spouses. However, during the marriage period, as the property of both spouses is jointly owned, whether it is possible to demand the party who fails to fulfill the obligation of upbringing to pay alimony is the main point of controversy in this case. Prior to the promulgation of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Marriage Law of the People's Republic of China (III), there had been controversy over this matter. Article 3 of the Interpretation (3) of the Marriage Law clearly stipulates that during the existence of the marriage relationship, if both parents or one party refuses to fulfill the obligation of raising their children, or if a minor or child who cannot live independently requests payment of maintenance fees, the people's court shall support it. Raising children is a legal obligation that parents should fulfill. Whether it is within or outside marriage, children born in wedlock, or children born out of wedlock, the parents' obligation to raise children remains unchanged. As long as one party fails to fulfill this obligation to raise children, underage children have the right to claim support from them. At the same time, in determining the specific amount of child care expenses, it is also necessary to maintain the normal needs of the child's clothing, food, housing, transportation, education, and medical needs based on their actual living needs. It is also necessary to comprehensively consider factors such as the economic income, expenses, current living burden, possibility of fulfilling obligations, and social status of both parents, and finally make a fair and reasonable judgment.

3、 Yu Mou v. Yu Mouwang in a dispute over alimony

——Can the standard of maintenance fees increase with rising prices?

（1） Basic facts of the case

Plaintiff Yu's mother and father divorced through mediation in 2008, and both parties reached a mediation agreement. Yu was raised by his mother, and his father Yu hoped to pay a one-time support fee of 23000 yuan in court. In 2013, Yu attended the second grade of primary school at a bilingual experimental school with an annual tuition fee of 3600 yuan. His mother had no fixed income and her main source of income was working. Later, Yu filed a lawsuit in court requesting his father, Yu, to pay a monthly maintenance fee of 1000 yuan until he reaches the age of 18 on June 30, 2023.

（2） Judgment results

According to Article 37 of the Marriage Law of the People's Republic of China, agreements or judgments regarding children's living and education expenses shall not prevent children from making reasonable demands to either parent, if necessary, in excess of the amount originally agreed upon in the agreement or judgment. Article 18 of the "Several Specific Opinions of the Supreme People's Court on the Handling of Child Support Fees in Divorce Cases by the People's Court" stipulates that if the original amount of childcare fees is insufficient to maintain the actual living standards of the local area, children may request an increase in childcare fees. In this case, the plaintiff sued Yu's parents for divorce in 2008. At that time, both parties agreed that Yu's father would pay a one-time child support fee of 23000 yuan in court, with an average of 62.5 yuan per month. In 2012, the per capita living expenses of rural residents in Henan Province were 5032.14 yuan, with an average of 419 yuan per month. Based on the above situation, it is evident that the alimony originally paid by Yu's father is currently insufficient to maintain the actual living standards of the local area. Therefore, the People's Court of Queshan County, Zhumadian City has ruled in support of the plaintiff's request for an increase in alimony.

（3） Typical significance

Many countries and regions around the world follow the principle of "prioritizing the interests of the child" and "the principle of the best interests of the child" when legislating marriage and family laws. Currently, China's Marriage Law and Minors Protection Law also clearly stipulate the principle of protecting the legitimate rights and interests of women and children. The principle of prioritizing the interests of minors and the principle of maximizing the interests of minors should become the basic principles of marriage and family legislation in China, and efforts should be made to prevent and reduce the impact of parental divorce on the living environment of minors, as well as adverse factors such as character development, ideological changes, and learning and growth of minors.

In marriage and family cases, when the people's court makes judgments and mediates on the maintenance fees for underage children, the standard of maintenance fees is generally determined based on the average living standard of the local society at that time. However, with the development of the economy, the improvement of living standards, and the rise of prices, the basis for the original court judgment and mediation of maintenance fees no longer exists or has undergone significant changes. If the maintenance fees are paid according to the conditions and standards at that time, they can no longer meet the basic living requirements of minors and cannot guarantee the normal life and learning of minors. Therefore, laws and judicial interpretations stipulate that underage children have the right to demand an increase in maintenance fees from the obligation holder based on legal circumstances. This case is based on the consideration of maximizing the protection of the interests of underage children. In the case where the original mediation agreement has become legally effective, it is allowed for underage child Yu to file a new lawsuit with the people's court, supporting his claim to increase his father's upbringing expenses in accordance with the law. This judgment is in line with the traditional family virtue education of respecting the elderly and loving the young in our Chinese nation, and is in line with the requirements of socialist core values.

4、 Feng Mougang and Zhou Mouwei v. Feng Mouwei for Termination of Adoption Relationship

——How is the adoption behavior recognized before the implementation of the Adoption Law?

（1） Basic facts of the case

In November 1987, the plaintiff Feng Mougang went out on a tricycle to sell vegetables, picked up a newly born abandoned baby near the ditch in the north of the village, and carried it home to raise it. The plaintiff Feng Mougang and his wife Zhang Mou declared the household registration for the abandoned baby on November 27, 1987, registered under the two people's registered residence, and named it "the eldest son", Feng Mouwei. Twenty years have passed in a flash, and the defendant Feng Mouwei grew up under the care of the second plaintiff, and married and had children with the help of the plaintiff and his wife. However, the defendant's change of attitude after marriage not only did not fulfill their obligation to support the elderly and frail plaintiff couple, but also allowed their wife to beat and scold the plaintiff, causing public anger among the villagers, causing physical and mental damage to the two plaintiffs, who lived outside for a long time and dared not go home. Helplessly, the old couple filed a lawsuit in court, demanding the termination of their adoption relationship with the defendant and payment of compensation for living and education expenses.

（2） Judgment results

The People's Court of Huiji District, Zhengzhou City believes that the adoption of the defendant by the two plaintiffs in this case occurred in 1987, before the implementation of the Adoption Law of the People's Republic of China on April 1, 1992. Although the plaintiff did not handle legal procedures afterwards, considering that the plaintiff has been raising the defendant for more than 20 years, and there is a certificate issued by the village committee and testimony from neighbors and friends that the plaintiff and the defendant are adoptive parents and children, it should be treated according to the adoption relationship. After the defendant Feng Mouwei became an adult and became a family, he failed to properly handle family relationships and allowed his wife to beat and scold the plaintiff and his wife. However, after mediation by the local village committee and family elders, it was still unsuccessful, resulting in a deterioration of the relationship between the two plaintiffs and the defendant and the inability to live together. The plaintiff and his wife struggled to raise the defendant as an adopted child, but the defendant did not treat the elderly two plaintiffs kindly, causing harm to their physical and mental health. The court, in consideration of respecting the plaintiff's demands and safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of the elderly, supported the plaintiff's lawsuit request. According to Articles 27 and 30 of the Adoption Law of the People's Republic of China, According to the provisions of Articles 28 and 31 of the Opinions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Implementation of Civil Policies and Laws, the plaintiff Feng Mougang, Zhang Mougang, and defendant Feng Mouwei were dissolved from their adoption relationship; The defendant Feng Mouwei shall pay the plaintiff Feng Mougang and Zhang Mougang a compensation of 200000 yuan for living and education expenses within one month after the judgment takes effect.

（3） Typical significance

Supporting the elderly is a traditional virtue of the Chinese nation, and it is also an obligation that children should fulfill towards their parents. Whether they are biological or adopted children, they cannot shirk their responsibility for any reason. The plaintiff and his wife adopted the defendant in this case in 1987. Although they did not complete any adoption procedures in accordance with the law, the court should fully consider the plaintiff and their cultural level and the testimony of their neighbors when making a decision. If the plaintiff and his wife deny the adoption relationship solely because they failed to complete the adoption procedures, it will not only make the public unconvinced, but also be detrimental to protecting the plaintiff and her husband who have done good deeds. The defendant Feng Mouwei, as an abandoned baby retrieved by the plaintiff and his wife by the river, was able to grow up healthily and get married and have children. He was fully gifted by the plaintiff and his wife for their upbringing. The plaintiff and his wife worked hard to provide their adopted son with education, arranged their marriage, and helped them take care of their children. However, the defendant and his wife's behavior not only harmed the plaintiff and their legitimate rights and interests, but also had a negative impact on society, The fair judgment of the court is not only a punishment for ungrateful behavior, but also the direction of public opinion.

5、 Jia v. Liu's Maintenance Dispute Case

——Using Law to Rectify "Long Illness Without Filial Piety Before Bed"

（1） Basic facts of the case

The plaintiff, Jia, is 76 years old, elderly, weak and sickly, and unable to take care of himself. From 2012 to 2013, Jia spent over 300000 yuan on medical expenses alone for hospitalization due to illness. Jia gave birth to four sons and three daughters throughout his life, with three sons and three daughters being relatively filial. However, Liu, the third son, has not fulfilled any maintenance obligations for many years. During Jia's stay in the hospital, his three sons and daughters actively raised money and shared medical expenses together. And the third son Liu not only ignored his mother's condition, but also refused to share any medical expenses. Although repeatedly mediated by village officials, Liu was unable to hide. Helpless, Jia went to court to file a lawsuit, requesting that his son Liu be ordered to pay alimony, bear the medical expenses already spent, and share the annual medical and nursing expenses in the future.

（2） Judgment results

The People's Court of Yucheng County, Shangqiu City has held a public hearing to hear this case, and in accordance with Article 21 (3) of the Marriage Law of the People's Republic of China, "When a child fails to fulfill their maintenance obligations, parents who are unable to work or have financial difficulties have the right to demand that their child pay maintenance fees Article 14 of the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of the Rights and Interests of the Elderly: "Supporters shall fulfill their obligations of providing economic support, daily care, and spiritual comfort to the elderly, and take care of the special needs of the elderly. Supporters refer to the children of the elderly and other persons who are legally obligated to support them. The spouse of the caregiver shall assist the caregiver in fulfilling their support obligations The first paragraph of Article 15 states that "the caregiver shall provide timely treatment and care to the elderly who are sick; for the elderly who are in financial difficulties, medical expenses shall be provided." The second paragraph of Article 19 states that "if the caregiver fails to fulfill their maintenance obligations, the elderly have the right to demand payment of maintenance fees from the caregiver." The judgment supports Jia's lawsuit request.

（3） Typical significance

Supporting the elderly is a traditional virtue of the Chinese nation, and it is also a legal obligation that children should fulfill towards their parents. Children should not only support their parents, but also respect and care for them, and provide active support in all aspects of family life. It is not allowed to refuse to fulfill the obligation of maintenance by giving up inheritance rights or other reasons. If a child fails to fulfill their maintenance obligations, parents have the right to demand that their child pay maintenance and medical expenses. When parents are old, weak, or disabled, children should be taken good care of, so that they can receive emotional and spiritual comfort and spend their later years in peace. The defendant Liu in this case, as one of the seven children of the plaintiff, is obligated to provide for their mother, both morally, ethically, and legally. In the case of an elderly, weak, and ill mother, the defendant should jointly bear the obligation of providing for her with other siblings, so that the mother can live a peaceful and happy life in her later years. However, the defendant has the ability to fulfill the obligation of providing for her, but repeatedly evades it, And openly speaking out disregarding the elderly mother, causing a negative impact in the local area and causing public anger. The court, on the premise of confirming the relationship and facts between the two parties, ordered the defendant to fulfill their maintenance obligations in accordance with the law, demonstrating the authority of the rule of law and maintaining moral standards.

6、 Chen Mouzhen v. Chen Mouling and Chen Mouxia in the Case of Support Dispute

——Casting the "Red and Black List of Filial Piety" with Circuit Trial

（1） Basic facts of the case

On May 14, 2015, plaintiff Chen Mouzhen sued his son Chen Mouling and daughter Chen Mouxia in court, claiming that her daughter Chen Mouxia had fulfilled her maintenance obligations. However, her son Chen Mouling not only failed to fulfill his maintenance obligations, but also took the demolition compensation and 2.9 acres of contracted land as his own, often beating the plaintiff without reason. Therefore, the plaintiff Chen Mouzhen sued his son Chen Mouling and daughter Chen Mouxia to the court, requesting that the defendant Chen Mouling pay a monthly maintenance fee of 1000 yuan and return the plaintiff's 2.9 acre contracted land and 18000 yuan in cash.

（2） Judgment results

The People's Court of Suiyang District, Shangqiu City believes that the defendant, as the plaintiff's son, has a legal obligation to support the plaintiff and should be fully responsible for the occurrence of this dispute. The plaintiff requests that the defendant return 18000 yuan in compensation for the demolition of their house and provide partial support for the defendant Chen's claim for alimony; Taking into account the living conditions of the defendant Chen Mouzhen's family and the per capita consumption expenditure standards of urban residents in Henan Province in 2015, it is appropriate for the defendant Chen Mouzhen to receive and pay the plaintiff a monthly alimony of 360 yuan. The plaintiff has lost the ability to work, and the defendant Chen has the obligation to cultivate the 2.9 acre contracted land under the plaintiff's name, but the profits should be the plaintiff's share. Due to the plaintiff's current residence with her daughter Chen Mouxia, the defendant Chen Mouxia has fulfilled her maintenance obligations, and the plaintiff has clearly stated that she has withdrawn the lawsuit against her daughter Chen Mouxia. Based on this, in accordance with Article 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, and 22 (1) of the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of the Rights and Interests of the Elderly, Article 21 (3) of the Marriage Law of the People's Republic of China, and Article 64 of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, The defendant Chen Mouling shall pay the plaintiff Chen Mouzhen a monthly alimony of 360 yuan starting from May 2015 (including May) within ten days after the judgment takes effect, which shall be paid on the first day of each month; The defendant Chen Mouling shall refund the plaintiff Chen Mouzhen's compensation of 18000 yuan for house demolition within ten days after the judgment takes effect. The case was tried on a circuit in the village where Chen Mouling was located. Chen Mouling apologized to his father Chen Mouzhen in court and knelt down to beg his father's forgiveness. The judgment is now effective and fulfilled.

（3） Typical significance

The crow has the righteousness of feeding back, and the lamb has the grace of kneeling and lactation. Filial piety comes first, and it is a traditional virtue of the Chinese nation for children to support their parents, as well as a clear provision of the law. The family is the cell of society, and if the family is disharmonious, social harmony becomes a rootless tree. The defendant in this case, Chen Mouling, not only did not support his elderly father, but also robbed money and land, using violence. His unfilial behavior runs counter to the good moral tradition of the Chinese nation and is out of place.

After receiving the case, the People's Court of Suiyang District in Shangqiu City believed that it was a typical case of "trial one case, education one piece". Therefore, a notice of the trial was posted in advance in the village where the original defendant was located, and the case was tried through circuit trial. During the trial, the education of the judge, the audience's comments, and the father's accusations formed an undeniable positive energy, forcing the defendant Chen Mouling to admit his wrongdoing in court, kneel down to beg his father's forgiveness, and promise to fulfill the court's judgment obligations seriously. The people's court, through circuit trials, publicly conducts trials to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the elderly, and combines social public opinion to create a "red and black list of filial piety", which can be regarded as a form of exploration for the judicial organs on the path of cultivating socialist core values.

7、 Yue v. Cao Divorce Dispute Case

——The manifestation of the principle of fairness in divorce cases

（1） Basic facts of the case

Yue and Cao were introduced to register their marriage in 1999. Having two children after marriage. After marriage, both parties often argue over family matters, resulting in a breakdown of the couple's relationship. Yue requested a divorce from Cao, who acknowledged the breakdown of their relationship and agreed to divorce. Both parties reached an agreement on the upbringing of children and the distribution of some common property. After investigation, it was found that Cao is a rural housewife who works underground and takes care of a family, but does not have a job or a fixed income.

（2） Judgment results

After trial, the Qibin District Court and Intermediate People's Court of Hebi City believe that Yue and Cao have broken down their relationship and should be allowed to divorce. As a housewife, Cao paid a lot to the family and did not have a fixed source of income. After divorce, it would lead to difficulties in life. According to the relevant provisions of the Marriage Law, Yue was sentenced to provide economic assistance of 20000 yuan to Cao.

（3） Typical significance

In a marital relationship, the woman is often in a disadvantaged position. On the one hand, they often sacrifice their work or even their career to take care of their families; On the other hand, when there are marital disputes, the woman often fails to provide direct economic income to the family, resulting in her legitimate rights and interests not being protected. When trying such cases, it is necessary to fully investigate the facts of the case, and for the woman who has indeed paid more obligations to the family, a certain amount of economic assistance should be awarded to ensure that her legitimate rights and interests are protected. In this case, considering that Cao made significant contributions to the family by raising children and taking care of the elderly while living together with his wife, he made significant contributions; After divorce, there was no fixed economic income and there was a lot of financial pressure to raise children. Therefore, Yue was sentenced to provide financial assistance of 20000 yuan to Cao.

8、 Property dispute case after divorce between Zhang and Chen

——Don't use marriage as a tool for profit

（1） Basic facts of the case

In June 2011 of the lunar calendar, Zhang and Chen were introduced to get engaged. Due to the need for land compensation in Zhang's production group, the Zhang family registered their marriage after less than a month of dating in order to quickly obtain more compensation for the family's "imports". Less than three days after marriage, Zhang continued to study abroad, while Chen stayed with the Zhang family for only a few months before returning to his mother's house. Afterwards, Chen had multiple disputes over demanding land compensation of 58700 yuan from Zhang for each person in the production team. In 2013, Zhang sued for divorce twice in court on the grounds that the couple had a short time together and had no emotional foundation. In the hopeless situation of reconciliation, the Xiangcheng County People's Court sentenced the two to divorce in June 2014 on the grounds that their marital relationship had indeed broken down. After divorce, Chen demanded that Zhang's parents return their land compensation of 58700 yuan. Zhang's parents refused to hand it over on the grounds that they had already spent all their money on marriage, hospitality, and furniture. After multiple unsuccessful demands, Chen sued Zhang's parents again on the grounds of unjust enrichment.

（2） Judgment results

After trial, the People's Court of Xiangcheng County and the Intermediate People's Court of Xuchang City held that the land compensation was jointly owned property acquired by Chen based on his legal marital relationship, and Chen had ownership of his shares. The reason why Zhang's parents argued that all the money was used for marriage, hospitality, and furniture purchase was not recognized, and Chen's lawsuit was supported. Zhang's parents were sentenced to repay Chen's land compensation of 58700 yuan.

（3） Typical significance

With the rapid development of urbanization, various disputes surrounding rural land are also on the rise. As in this case, the Zhang family regards obtaining land compensation and other benefits as the main consideration and purpose of marriage. Such hasty marriages often lack emotional foundation and are extremely unstable, which is extremely irresponsible for individuals, families, and society, and also carries legal and financial risks. Money cannot buy love, nor can it lock marriage. It is better to be cautious when it comes to life.

9、 Case of divorce dispute between Shao and Xue

——In the era of "online love", we should cherish fate even more

（1） Basic facts of the case

In 2012, young people born in the 1980s, Shao and Xue, met during an online chat. The two had a long-term communication through the internet and gradually began dating and meeting. After more than a year of acquaintance and love, they finally officially got married in September 2013. After marriage, the two of them had a good relationship and gave birth to a child the following year. However, problems between the two began to arise from then on. Due to different lifestyle habits and a lack of in-depth understanding of each other's family members and personality traits during online communication, Xue, as a wife, had conflicts with her mother-in-law who came to take care of the baby after marriage. As a result, Shao and Xue often had arguments and arguments. During an argument, Xue finally couldn't bear it and moved hands with his mother-in-law. Helplessly, her husband Shao filed for divorce in April 2015 on the grounds that their relationship had broken down.

（2） Judgment results

The People's Court of Huiji District, Zhengzhou City, after trial, found that both parties easily filed for divorce due to some family matters, which is not very serious. Friction within the family is inevitable, and coupled with the fact that the plaintiff and defendant were engaged in a marriage through online dating, there is still hope for further understanding and easing of tensions between them. To achieve a perfect marriage, both men and women need to understand and tolerate each other. In this case, the plaintiff and defendant still have hope to restore the marriage relationship, but their relationship has not completely broken down. Therefore, the judgment rejects the lawsuit request. The original and defendant have not appealed after being sentenced by the judge to interpret the law.

（3） Typical significance

In recent years, with the rapid development of information technology and transportation, "online love" and "flash marriage" are no longer rare, and long-distance love "thousands of miles away" is gradually becoming popular. However, a large number of divorce disputes, especially cases of marriage conflicts caused by family conflicts after the birth of children, are on the rise. Young people themselves have little emotional experience, are overly emotional, and do not take marriage relationships too seriously. It is not wise to resort to divorce if there is a slight contradiction. The court should also guide the parties involved in the trial to understand each other and jointly maintain the marriage relationship. Young couples should not be easily judged for divorce, and more attention should be paid to leaving buffer and reconciliation space for the conflicting parties. When the court ruled against divorce, it also emphasized that both spouses should pay more attention to communication and adjustment in marriage, enhance their sense of responsibility, and show mutual understanding and tolerance when facing conflicts. At the same time, it is also necessary to guide the older generation to pay attention not to interfere too much with their children's marital life. They should position themselves properly, let their children handle their own marital problems more freely, and strive to maintain the harmony of their children's small families.

10、 Dispute over Liability for Damage after Divorce between Zhou and Zhang

——Can the derailer be requested to pay spiritual compensation?

（1） Basic facts of the case

In 2003, plaintiff Zhou and defendant Zhang registered their marriage and gave birth to one daughter and one son after marriage. In July 2013, Zhang filed a lawsuit for divorce from Zhou, and the court presided over the mediation of the divorce. The main content of the mediation agreement was that both parties voluntarily divorced, and Zhang paid Zhou RMB 38000 in a lump sum, without further investigation by both parties. In May 2013, Zhang gave birth to a daughter with a woman who was not involved in the case. Zhou claimed that he only discovered this matter after his divorce, and now he is suing Zhang for compensation of 30000 yuan for mental damage.

（2） Judgment results

The People's Court of Huaxian County, Henan Province, after trial, found that in accordance with Article 4 of the Marriage Law of the People's Republic of China: "Husband and wife shall be faithful to each other and respect each other; family members shall respect the elderly, love the children, help each other, and maintain equal, harmonious, and civilized marriage and family relationships." Article 46 stipulates that if divorce is caused, the innocent party has the right to request compensation for damages; Article 28 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Marriage Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates "compensation for damages" in Article 46 of the Marriage Law, including material damages and spiritual damages. Defendant Zhang, during his marriage with the plaintiff, engaged in an improper sexual relationship with others and gave birth to a daughter, resulting in divorce. He should bear the corresponding civil compensation responsibility and support the plaintiff's request for damages, that is, order the defendant Zhang to pay the plaintiff Zhou a mental damage compensation of RMB 15000. After the verdict was pronounced, neither party appealed.

（3） Typical significance

Being faithful to each other and not betraying love is not only a traditional virtue, but also a legal obligation for couples. Loyalty to marriage is an intolerable form of dishonesty. It not only damages marital relationships, breaks up families, and harms innocent children, but also undermines social norms and is prohibited by law. Therefore, after divorce, it was discovered that the defendant had engaged in infidelity during their marriage and requested compensation for mental damage. The people's court supported it in accordance with the law to demonstrate the fairness and moral power of the law.