Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

[Claim]

A. 1) In principle, a third party’s act of infringing on or impeding the maintenance of a married couple’s community life falling under the essence of marriage by committing an unlawful act with the spouse, and infringing on the spouse’s right as the spouse, thereby causing mental distress to the spouse constitutes a tort (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Meu2441, May 29, 2015). In full view of the respective descriptions and arguments of evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 8, the Plaintiff and C are legal couples who completed the marriage report on December 19, 200, and the Defendant may establish a marital relationship with C even with the Plaintiff’s spouse, with the knowledge of the fact that the Plaintiff’s spouse is the Plaintiff’s spouse. Accordingly, according to the above recognition, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant had caused mental distress between the Plaintiff and C, thereby infringing on the Plaintiff’s right as the spouse and causing mental distress to the Plaintiff. Therefore, it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant already suffered mental distress between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff.

Even if it is alleged to the effect that this does not constitute a tort against the plaintiff, but there is no evidence that the defendant committed an unlawful act with C and C at the time of April 2, 2018, and there is no evidence to deem that the common life of the plaintiff and C had reached the irrecoverable degree, and thus, the above argument by the defendant is rejected.

B. The following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the evidence evidence Nos. 1 through 9 and the purport of the entire pleadings, namely, the marriage period and family relationship between the Plaintiff and C, and the circumstances and details of fraudulent acts, are diagnosed and performed as a maternal flick disease, which is a cerebrovascular disease, around April 2015.