A. On September 22, 2003, the Plaintiff completed a marriage report with Nonparty C on September 2, 2003, and has two children among them.

B. The Defendant, as a staff member of D, was in charge of the D entrusted project management project, and became aware of C that he/she had participated in the said project from April 2014.

(c) From August 1, 2014 to the same year;

9. up to March, C sent 275 times to the Defendant, and the Defendant sent C phone calls or text messages over 165 times.

On August 26, 2014, the Defendant: “I wanting to see that I wish to see me with a strong speech. However, I did not find it more appropriate for me to me, for a long time. It is rare in the sense that me will fry in the past. I need to her panty to her panty. At all times, I would like to her name to her English, and I would like to her to her only one year in which C’s name was inscribed in English.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and video Nos. 9

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant committed an unlawful act with C, who is the plaintiff's spouse, and thereby the plaintiff suffered mental impulses. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay for mental damage suffered by the plaintiff in money.

B. Although there is a space between the Plaintiff’s husband C and the Plaintiff’s husband C on duty, C was an indecent act by force against the Defendant at an automobile, C’s accommodation, or unmanned telecom, the Defendant did not have any unlawful act, such as having a sexual relation with C.

3. Determination

A. (1) In principle, a third party’s act of infringing on or interfering with a couple’s communal life falling under the essence of marriage and infringing on a spouse’s right as the spouse, thereby causing emotional distress to the spouse, constitutes tort.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Da1899 delivered on May 13, 2005, etc.). (2)