With the development of the economy and the progress of society, people's minds are becoming more and more open, and they are more tolerant in the matter of marriage and love between men and women.
Many men and women live together during love, but love is beautiful and life is trivial.
A seemingly beautiful love, after the two lived together for a period of time, various contradictions came out, some people know how to tolerate each other, after a period of running-in, they still came together. And some people have to break up because the two personalities really can't get along, there is no way to live together.
Two people live together for a period of time without financial entanglement, do not love, can simply and neatly shoot two scattered, and then go their separate ways. I am afraid that the two have a dispute over money, break up, and the calculation of money is not clear.
After living together for 7 months, the fiancé withdrew from the marriage and demanded the return of the 68,000 dowry
After a woman surnamed Tang and her fiancé lived together for 7 months, the two had irreconcilable conflicts over marriage, and the two eventually broke up. The fiancé asked for the return of the dowry of 68,000 yuan, and Ms. Tang's words caused heated discussion among countless netizens.
The story goes like this, Ms. Tang and Mr. Wu were introduced to each other and fell in love in early 2020. On March 9, 2020, the two held an engagement ceremony in accordance with local customs.
At the engagement ceremony, Mr. Wu gave Ms. Tang a dowry of 68,000 yuan, and in April 2020, the two went to Shanghai to work and lived together in Shanghai until early November 2020, when the two sides had a conflict over the marriage.
Mr. Wu proposed to withdraw from the marriage and asked Ms. Tang to return the dowry of 68,000 yuan. Later, because the two parties failed to reach an agreement on the amount to be returned, Mr. Wu filed a lawsuit with the court.
The first instance held that the 68,000 yuan gift paid by Mr. Wu to Ms. Tang was based on the marriage relationship between the two and was paid in accordance with custom. The court held that because the parties had a conflict over the marriage, the marriage contract was voluntarily dissolved, and the basis for the payment of the gift money was eliminated. Mr. Wu demanded the return of the dowry paid, which was in accordance with the law, so She ordered Ms. Tang to return Mr. Wu's dowry of 68,000 yuan.
Dissatisfied with the court's judgment, Ms. Tang said that during the cohabitation period, 38,000 yuan was spent for both parties, which should be discounted against the dowry, which is a real cost. In response to this statement, the court finally decided to redeem the dowry of 12,000 yuan, and the first instance judgment was that Ms. Tang returned Mr. Wu's dowry of 56,000 yuan.
Ms. Tang was not satisfied with this judgment and filed an appeal. Ms. Tang believes that the two have lived together for 7 months, and the dowry used for living together should not be refunded, and if it is refunded, the joint expenses during the cohabitation period between the two parties should also be calculated and deducted.
Ms. Tang also said that she actually kept the dowry of 68,000 yuan, of which the dowry was used during the period when the two sides lived together. The law supported the return of the dowry with the intention of punishing the dishonest behavior of malicious evasion, and she did not repent of the marriage, but Mr. Wu was reluctant to marry.
If you rely on the logic and results of the judgment of the court of first instance, it really confirms the two words "white prostitute" at present, washing, cooking, sleeping with her, serving her boyfriend for seven months, and in the end she will have to compensate more than 50,000 yuan.
In the end, the Intermediate People's Court of Qiandongnan Miao and Dong Autonomous Prefecture held that it was unfair for the court of first instance to fold a dowry of 12,000 yuan at its discretion, and the court of second instance changed its judgment based on the facts of the case, and Ms. Tang returned Mr. Wu's dowry of 34,000 yuan.
Netizens said that if according to the first-instance judgment, Ms. Tang was really prostituted for several months
A netizen said that if it is really according to the first-instance judgment, Ms. Tang was really prostituted for several months. The judgment in this case was unfair, the man was going to terminate the marriage contract, and the woman was not at fault. The woman leaves the man and then goes to the husband, which is bound to lower the standard and cause harm to the woman, and I think this bride price should not be refunded.
Some netizens also said that the bride price is a traditional custom, is the man's commitment to the woman's marriage commitment, cohabitation for seven months, the woman is not at fault, the man asks to withdraw from the marriage, the bride price is not refunded in principle. According to the verdict of the first instance, only more women will be injured in the future.
However, some netizens believe that the court made a judgment in accordance with the law, the bride price is the embodiment of the marriage offer, the dissolution of the marriage and the return of the bride price are also legal, and the woman deserves sympathy, but this kind of premarital cohabitation is not advisable, and the lesson is painful.
There are also melon eaters who say that the last 34,000 yuan cannot be refunded, which should be regarded as compensation for Ms. Tang. Eat and sleep with 7 months, go out bread night is more than this cost. The court should not consider that the woman is the injured party, to make additional compensation, the court's judgment is too dogmatic, the law should not be so cold, there should be temperature.
What is your opinion on this, and do you think the court's decision is reasonable? Should Ms. Tang accept the court's judgment demanding that Ms. Tang refund Mr. Wu 34,000 yuan?