A. The Plaintiff is a legally married couple who completed the marriage report on September 23, 2009, and has one child between C and C.

B. Around June 2017, the Defendant came to know of the fact that he had sexual intercourse with C with the workplace, maintained the illegal relationship, and maintained the illegal relationship with the Plaintiff, such as having sexual intercourse several times even after having complied with the illegal relationship.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. A third party shall not interfere with a couple’s communal living falling under the essence of marriage by intervening in a couple’s communal living of another person and causing a failure of a couple’s communal living. A third party’s act of infringing on or interfering with a couple’s communal living falling under the essence of marriage by committing an unlawful act with one of the married couple, thereby infringing on his/her right as a spouse and causing mental pain to the spouse, in principle, constitutes tort.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997 Decided November 20, 2014). According to the aforementioned facts, the Defendant committed an unlawful act, such as entering into a sexual relationship with C with the knowledge that C is a spouse. Since the Defendant’s act is deemed to infringe upon the Plaintiff’s marital relationship or interfere with the maintenance thereof, the Defendant has a duty to pay emotional distress suffered by the Plaintiff in money.

B. Furthermore, with regard to the amount of consolation money, the amount of consolation money that the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff shall be determined as KRW 20 million by comprehensively taking into account all the various circumstances shown in the pleadings of the instant case, including the content, degree and period of fraudulent act between the Defendant and C, the marriage period and family relationship between the Plaintiff and C, and the impact of the Defendant’s fraudulent act on the Plaintiff

C. Therefore, the defendant is a tort against the plaintiff, which is KRW 20 million.