A. On August 18, 2017, the Plaintiff is a person who has a legal spouse who completed a marriage report with Nonparty C.

B. The Defendant maintained an inappropriate relationship with Nonparty C, starting from the Haman on 2017 to the firstman on 2018, as a company bonus of Nonparty C.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 7, Eul evidence 1 to 3 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The act that a third party of the relevant legal doctrine infringes on or interferes with a couple's communal life falling under the essence of marriage and infringes on a spouse's right as the spouse, thereby causing mental pain to the spouse, in principle, constitutes a tort.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997 Decided November 20, 2014 (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2011Meu2997). In addition, “illegal act by a spouse” under Article 840 Subparag. 1 of the Civil Act includes a wider concept, including the adultery, and includes any unlawful act that does not reach the common sense but does not fulfill the duty of mutual assistance of the husband and wife (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 88Meu7, May 24, 198). Whether it is 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.

Judgment

1) In light of the above legal principles, according to the above facts, the defendant was aware that C is a spouse, and the defendant committed an improper act, such as continuing to meet knife and continue to maintain knife, etc., on the ground that such act was committed by the defendant, and it is obvious in light of the empirical rule that the plaintiff suffered a considerable mental pain, and therefore, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for mental damage. 2) As to the amount of consolation money to be paid, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for health expenses and the plaintiff C.