A. The plaintiff is a legal couple who completed the marriage report on November 26, 1993, and C.

B. C came to know of the Defendant on the wintering and wintering of 2013, and thereafter contact and became final and conclusive.

C. Around December 2015, the Plaintiff directly found the Defendant and talked with the Defendant that “I will not contact with C in the future,” and C sent a text message to the Plaintiff on January 6, 2016, stating that “I would like to have a large number of halogeds and sent crimes, I would like to see that I would well see in the future.”

Around January 2017, the Defendant and C entered the Moelel, and C taken the image of the Defendant’s her cell phone with his cell phone.

E. The Defendant sent a text message to the Plaintiff, stating, “I am too bad to understand her mother who is difficult to be a woman such as the end of time, and I am not to do so. I do not tell me to do so at the end of time. I do not do so.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 6, 10, 12 (including the number of pages), the witness C's testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

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 and infringing on the spouse’s right as the spouse by committing an unlawful act with the spouse, constitutes tort (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997, Nov. 20, 2014). The term “unlawful act” in this context is a broad concept that includes adultery and does not reach common sense, but includes any unlawful act that does not conform to the husband’s duty of good faith, and whether it is an unlawful act or not shall be evaluated in consideration of the degree and circumstances of the specific case (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 8Meu7, May 24, 198; 92Meu68, Nov. 10, 1992).