A. The Plaintiff is a legally married couple who completed the marriage report on September 25, 2009, and the Defendant also has two children.

B. In the past 20 years, the Defendant came to know that C had been serving as public interest service personnel at the Defendant’s workplace, and had been contacted from time to time, and had maintained friendship with C at the Plaintiff and C’s marriage ceremony. However, since March 2016, the Defendant continued to engage in unlawful conduct, such as having sexual intercourse with C several times at the travel site and the telecom.

C. Around September 16, 2017, even after the Defendant’s relationship with the Defendant was discovered, C continued to continue to exist in her country, and, on March 4, 2018, promised as an angle to the Plaintiff that the relationship with the Defendant would not be met again, continued to exist as of March 4, 2018, and is currently living together with the Plaintiff.

[Ground for recognition] Gap evidence 1 through 6 (including branch numbers for those with a Serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Gap 13, 16, 21, 22, 24, 26, and 27, each of the statements and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

(a) A third party shall not interfere with a married couple’s communal living falling under the essence of marriage by interfering with a married couple’s communal living by causing a failure of a married couple’s communal living by participating in another person’s marital life. A third party’s act of infringing on or interfering with a married couple’s communal living falling under the essence of marriage by committing an unlawful act with the married couple, thereby infringing on his/her right as a spouse and causing mental distress

(Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997 Decided November 20, 2014). B.

According to the above facts of recognition, C is a spouse and the defendant is a spouse with the knowledge that C is a spouse, thereby infringing the plaintiff's right as the spouse by impeding the maintenance of the marital life and thereby infringing the plaintiff's right as the spouse. Thus, the defendant is liable to compensate for mental damage suffered by the plaintiff as a tort.

C. Furthermore, the amount of consolation money that the defendant should compensate is about.