A. The plaintiff is a husband and wife who completed the marriage report on September 3, 1980.

B. In around 2015, the Defendant, knowing that C is a spouse, sent and received Kakakao Stockholm messages with C several times, and committed improper acts, such as drinking C at his own home.

C. C has made up to the Plaintiff the rebuttal “I Love. I will not love any other person in the future. I have mistakenly made the Branch wind.”

[Based on recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including paper numbers), Eul's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant committed a fraudulent act with C, the spouse of the plaintiff, must pay consolation money to the plaintiff 50 million won.

3. In principle, a third party’s act of infringing on a couple’s communal life falling under the essence of marriage or interfering with the maintenance thereof and infringing on his/her spouse’s right as a spouse by committing an unlawful act with the spouse, constitutes a tort (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2011Meu2997, Nov. 20, 2014; 2013Meu2441, May 29, 2015). “Cheating” in this context refers to a broad concept that includes adultery and does not reach the adultery, but does not reach the adultery, and any unlawful act that does not conform to the marital duty, and whether it is an unlawful act or not shall be evaluated in consideration of the degree and circumstances of the specific case.

(Supreme Court Decision 2010Meu4095 Decided November 28, 2013). According to the foregoing facts, even though the Defendant knew that C is a spouse of C, it is recognized in light of the empirical rule that C continued to contact with inappropriate contents or to inflict mental pain on C’s spouse, who is the spouse of C. As such, the Defendant constitutes a tort against the Plaintiff, since it constitutes a tort against the Plaintiff.