If I cheat, I'll pay you 1 million. The husband cheated after signing the loyalty agreement, and the court sentenced him to this

In 2009, Wang Dana, a native of Shaoyang, Hunan Province, and his wife, Li Haiyan, registered their marriage at the Danzhou Civil Affairs Bureau in Hainan Province. In 2015, Wang Dana wrote a "letter of guarantee" to the effect that if he cheated, he would compensate Li Haiyan for 1 million yuan. In December 2018, Li Haiyan discovered that Wang Dana had indeed cheated on him, and the two divorced that month.

In 2019, Wang Dana once again issued an IOU to Li Haiyan, saying that the marriage broke down due to an extramarital affair, and agreed to compensate Li Haiyan for 1 million yuan. Since then, he has issued three "letters of guarantee" to ensure he no longer associates with other women.

In June 2021, Li Haiyan sued Wang Dana for 1 million yuan in damages. Wang Dana's "letter of guarantee" and "IOU" became court evidence.

On September 8, the verdict in the case was made public. A municipal people's court held that the above-mentioned guarantees and IOUs fell within the scope of the husband and wife's "loyalty agreement", recognized their validity, and found that 1 million yuan was a moral damage compensation. However, based on Wang Dana's economic strength and salary income, he was eventually sentenced to pay Li Haiyan 200,000 yuan in mental damages.

In another similar case recently announced, a "loyalty agreement" signed by a cohabiting couple with an economic dispute in Changsha, Hunan Province, under the mediation of a sub-district office, was not recognized by the court.

The "guarantee" of the cheating husband: If the cheating leads to divorce, the compensation is 1 million yuan

According to the China Referee Network, Wang Dana and Li Haiyan married in 2009. On July 23, 2015, Wang Dana issued a letter of guarantee to Li Haiyan, stating: "If my marriage breaks down due to infidelity, I am willing to leave the house and only compensate Li Haiyan for 1 million yuan." Dana Wang, July 23, 2015. ”

In December 2018, Li Haiyan discovered that Wang Dana had an improper relationship with others and immediately signed a divorce agreement with Wang Dana. The agreement stipulates that the houses shared by the two parties shall be owned by the women and that the parties shall have no creditor's rights and debts. In the same month, they registered their divorce. In other words, Wang Dana "cleared himself out of the house."

On April 7, 2019, Wang Dana issued an IOU to Li Haiyan, which read: "I, Wang Dana (my marriage broke down due to infidelity in the marriage) On April 7, 2019, Wang Dana only owed his ex-wife Li Haiyan 1 million yuan. Wang Dana promised to pay all arrears by April 6, 2022. If the principal and interest are not repaid when due, Li Haiyan's costs of realizing her claims, including but not limited to attorneys' fees, litigation law, travel expenses and attorneys' fees extension costs, shall be borne by the debtor, Wang Dana, April 7, 2019. ”

Since then, on March 9, 2019, September 4, 2019, and June 7, 2020, Wang Dana has issued three pledges to Li Haiyan to ensure that he will not interact with other women.

The woman filed a lawsuit with a letter of guarantee and an IOU, and the court ordered the man to pay $200,000 in damages

In June 2021, Li Haiyan sued Wang Dana for failing to pay the 1 million yuan in arrears on time.

Wang Dana argued that the marriage guarantee issued by Li Haiyan was a conjugal guarantee written under her threat and did not express her true meaning. Wang Dana also said that he did not cheat with others, and the divorce was also because of emotional discord, not because of deception.

A municipal court confirmed the facts on the basis of guarantees, IOUs, divorce certificates, divorce agreements, and court statements from plaintiffs and defendants. The court held that the "letter of guarantee" produced by Wang Da fell within the scope of the "loyalty agreement" of the husband and wife as determined by the court.

A municipal people's court finally ruled that Wang Dana should pay Li Xiaoyan 200,000 yuan in moral damages within 10 days after the judgment took effect, rejecting Li Haiyan's other claims.

Explanation 1: Why are "loyalty agreements" recognized?

A municipal people's court held that in the case of Wang Dana and Li Haiyan, the defendant issued an IOU to the plaintiff after divorcing the plaintiff, and the IOU was not the defendant's loan to the plaintiff, nor was it the defendant's other debts to the plaintiff. Guarantees and IOUs signed by both parties fall within the scope of a "fidelity agreement" between husband and wife. Marital fidelity agreements remind married citizens to voluntarily restrict and restrict their sexual freedom. This is the result of the consent of both husband and wife, which is in accordance with the principles of the Civil Code, public order and good customs.

Wang argues that the letter of guarantee and IOU were issued under duress, but he did not provide any evidence to prove it. The Court did not support the defence's opinion. The agreement is a quantification of the parties' duty of fidelity, does not violate the prohibitions of the law, and is upheld by the courts.

Interpretation 2: The Loyalty Agreement stipulates 1 million yuan. Why is the amount of compensation 200,000?

A municipal court held that the 1 million yuan IOU issued by Wang Dana to Li Haiyan was the woman's claim for moral damages from the other party in order to prevent the man from cheating and to determine that the man had cheated. The duty of fidelity between husband and wife is a moral obligation. An agreement between one of the spouses and the other at the expense of moral obligations cannot be construed as an agreement establishing specific civil rights and obligations.

The amount of compensation for moral damage is based on Article 28 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Moral Damage (I), "Where compensation for moral damage is involved, the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Determination of Liability for Compensation for Moral Damage in Civil Torts" According to the relevant provisions, the parties in this case will give the plaintiff all their sole housing at the time of divorce. The defendants were largely out of the home and did not have long-term stable jobs and precarious incomes. Combined with the agreement between the two parties, combined with the local socio-economic level and the defendant's ability to bear, the amount of compensation for moral damage was determined to be 200,000 yuan.

Case comparison: The Cohabitation Fidelity Agreement signed by both spouses was not recognized by the court

It just so happens that there is a similar situation. In a recently released verdict, Wu Li and Gao Hai of Changsha, Hunan Province, lived together for a long time in the name of husband and wife. After the conflict, the two sides signed an agreement. When the two appeared in court, the court also held that the agreement fell under the category of "cohabitation loyalty agreement". However, unlike in the above case, the court did not determine the validity of the "loyalty agreement".

According to the judgment documents, Wu Li and Gao Hai have lived together as husband and wife since May 2010. After that, Wu Li paid most of the house money and bought a house. They have lived in this house since 2012.

In 2017, the two had discord and economic contradictions. After mediation by the local neighborhood committee, the two sides reached an agreement: Gao Hai should be responsible, use legitimate means to make money, give Wu Li 3,000 yuan per month living expenses, and Gao Hai pay living expenses every month to correct bad habits. Gao Overseas's debts have no relationship with Li Haizhen and he himself is responsible for paying them off. Wu Li gave Gao Hai a one-year observation period, if it was not cashed, he left unconditionally, there was no division of property, and his family members could not find Wu Li.

On November 24, 2020, Wu Li clashed with Gao Hai. Gao Hai locked the door of the house involved in the case. Wu Li could not enter the house, so she called the police. Subsequently, Wu Li filed a lawsuit with the court, ordering Gao Hai to move out of the house immediately

The court held that Wu Li and Gao Hai had lived together in the name of husband and wife for more than ten years, had not registered their marriage, and the cohabitation relationship was not protected by law. Agreements concluded between the parties to stabilize cohabitation feelings and to establish men's obligations during cohabitation, on the one hand, set out only the duties and responsibilities of men and did not mention the obligations of women, which is manifestly unfair; Cohabitation in the name of husband and wife without a marriage license is inconsistent with the general concepts, social customs and social morality of ordinary people, and violates the basic principles of public order and good habits. At the same time, the court held that Gao Hai paid part of the purchase price and contributed to the renovation of the house. The house is the common property of the two people during their cohabitation.

In summary, the court held that the so-called "cohabitation loyalty agreement" signed by Wu Li and Gao Hai on the basis of the cohabitation relationship in order to stabilize the cohabitation relationship violated the law and should be invalid. In the end, the court rejected Wu Li's request.