A. The Plaintiff and C are legally married couple who completed the marriage report on November 22, 1981.

B. After becoming aware of the Defendant through the Internet car page, the Plaintiff visited the Defendant’s house located in Cotakia in C with the Plaintiff’s husband C around January 2016, and around that time, the Plaintiff became doubtful with the Defendant and C.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, purport of whole pleadings.

2. Determination

A. The defendant asserts that there was no fact that the plaintiff claimed consolation money against the defendant on the premise of a fraudulent act between the defendant and C.

B. 1) Determination 1) An act of a third party who is liable for damages by committing an unlawful act with the husband and wife, thereby infringing on a couple’s communal life falling under the essence of marriage, interfering with the maintenance thereof, and infringing on the spouse’s right as the spouse, thereby causing emotional distress to the spouse, constitutes a tort in principle (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Meu2441, May 29, 2015). In addition, an unlawful act under Article 840 subparag. 1 of the Civil Act is a larger concept including any unlawful act that is deemed as not faithful to the husband and wife’s duty to emotional distress, even if it does not reach the common sense as a broad concept.

Based on the above legal principles, we examine the contents and images of Gap evidence 1-51, Gap evidence 2-1-2, and Eul evidence 2-1 and Eul evidence 2. The defendant and Eul sent and received a Kakakakao Stockholm message and exchanged the pictures taken of his body and sexual part between them with the other party. The defendant and C sent and received the Kakao Stockholm message and sent to the other party, and the Kakao Kakao Stockholm message sent and received by the defendant and C are "Reportfe," "from one day to one day of delivery," and "Nado Party and Love and Love," respectively.