The defendant, who had worked in the same workplace as C, was aware of the fact that C was his spouse, had been in the middle of March 2017, and had provided C and private currency with C and the teaching system.

C was resigned at the end of July 2017, and the relationship between the defendant and C was completely organized.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry or video of Gap1-5 evidence (including attachment of a provisional number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The act that a third party who is liable for damages causes mental pain to the spouse by committing an unlawful act with the spouse of the married couple, thereby infringing on the common life of the married couple falling under the essence of the marriage or interfering with the maintenance thereof and infringing on the spouse's right as the spouse, constitutes tort in principle.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2013Meu2441, May 29, 2015; 2004Da1899, May 13, 2005). “Cheating” in this context refers to a wider concept, including the adultery, and includes any unlawful act that does not reach the gap between husband and wife, but does not follow the husband’s duty of mutual assistance, and whether it constitutes an unlawful act ought to be evaluated in consideration of the degree and circumstances of the specific case.

(See Supreme Court Decision 88Meu7 delivered on May 24, 198, and Supreme Court Decision 92Meu68 delivered on November 10, 1992, etc.). According to the above basic facts, the Defendant, knowing that C is a spouse, was an inappropriate teaching system with C.

This constitutes an unlawful act that infringes on a marital life contrary to the essence of marriage or interferes with the maintenance thereof and infringes on the rights of the plaintiff's spouse.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to do so in money for mental damage suffered by the plaintiff.

B. Details and degree of fraudulent act committed by the Defendant and C, which can be known from the above basic facts.