A. 1) On September 25, 2009, the Plaintiff: (a) C is a legally married couple who completed the marriage report on September 25, 2009; and (b) C requires the Plaintiff to be divorced and divorced on August 13, 2016; (c) C went back on the following day.

3) The Defendant is a non-party company of Lone Star Global Corporation (hereinafter “non-party company”) around October 2015.

A) The Defendant became aware of C who entered the same company and worked for the same company. The Defendant, despite being aware of C’s spouse by marriage, has, even though he/she was married, maintained a close relationship with C with C, maintained a close relationship with C, and brought in or dance with C in an officetel in which C is residing. [The facts that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, and the entries, images, and the purport of the entire pleadings in the Evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 7, and 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

B. (1) Determination whether liability for damages has arisen or not) The third party's act of infringing on or interfering with the common life of the married couple falling under the essence of marriage by committing an unlawful act with the married couple, and infringing on the right as the spouse and causing mental suffering to the spouse, in principle, constitutes tort.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997 Decided November 20, 2014 (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2011Meu2997). “Unlawful act committed by a spouse” under Article 840 Subparag. 1 of the Civil Act is a wider concept including a adultery, and does not reach the common sense, but includes any unlawful act not conforming to the husband’s duty of good faith (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 88Meu7, May 24, 198). Whether an act constitutes an unlawful act ought to be evaluated in consideration of the degree and circumstances of each specific

(Supreme Court Decision 2010Meu4095 Decided November 28, 2013). (b) According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant knew that C is a spouse, thereby making physical contacts with C and continuing to maintain the relationship between C and his/her employees with the awareness that C is a spouse, and thereby, the marriage between the Plaintiff and C was faced with the collapse crisis.

Therefore, the defendant.