A. The Plaintiff and Nonparty C are legally married couple who completed the marriage report on September 30, 1965.

B. On October 1996, the Plaintiff and C came to know that the Defendant was employed as an employee while operating a mutually cafeteria with the trade name “D”.

C. The Defendant continued to contact with C even after the said restaurant was opened, and continued to contact C. From October 1, 2013 to April 28, 2014, the Defendant sent and received approximately KRW 123 telephone conversationss or text messagess over seven months.

On November 8, 2014, the Defendant sent C a text message stating “I am Ham Ham Ham Ham Hamm Hamm Hammm Hamm Hammm Mamm Mamm Mamm Mam Mam Mam Mam Mam Mamm Mam Mamm Mam Mam Mam Mam Mam Mam Mam Mam Mam Mam Mam Mam Mam Mam Mam Mam Mam Mam Mam Mam Mam Mam Man?” On November 16, 2014, the Defendant sent the text message stating “I am Man Mam Ham Ham Ham Man?

E. C maintained an unlawful relationship for a long time, including the Plaintiff’s sexual intercourse with the Defendant several times.

F. The plaintiff and C maintain a matrimonial relationship until now.

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 2-7, 12, and 13 each entry and video, and whether all pleadings are held

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. In principle, a third party’s act of infringing a couple’s communal life falling under the essence of marriage or interfering with the maintenance thereof and infringing a spouse’s right as the spouse by committing an unlawful act with the spouse, thereby constituting a tort (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Da1899, May 13, 2005). In this case, the term “unlawful act” is a broad concept that includes the adultery, and it includes any unlawful act that does not reach the common sense but does not follow the husband’s duty of good faith, and it includes any unlawful act that does not conform to the husband’s duty of good faith.