A. On October 25, 2013, the Plaintiff completed a marriage report with C on October 25, 2013, and is between C and C, and has one child between C and C.

B. On September 2019, the Defendant sent an overseas travel with C several times, and had a relation with C, such as living together from February 2020 to August 20 of the same year.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's entries and images, and the purport of the whole pleadings, as well as the whole pleadings, of Gap's evidence 1 through 9, 11 through 17, 21, 22 (including virtual numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply)

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Defendant, who is liable for damages, committed an unlawful act with C, who is the spouse of the Plaintiff, thereby infringing upon the Plaintiff’s communal living or interfering with the maintenance thereof, and infringing on the Plaintiff’s right as the spouse.

Therefore, it is clear in light of the empirical rule that the plaintiff suffered mental suffering.

The defendant is obligated to pay consolation money to the plaintiff as compensation for mental damage.

(A) The Defendant asserted that C was not in a marital state and was sent to C with a relationship with C. However, in light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the aforementioned evidence, namely, the Plaintiff sent the Defendant a photograph stored in C’s mobile phone, asked the Defendant whether he was a photograph, and asked the Defendant whether he was a photograph, and the Defendant sent the Kakakakao Stockholm message to the Defendant, even though he was aware of the fact that he was in the telephone, and even though he was in the telephone, the Defendant sent the Kakakao Stockholm message to the Defendant without asking or asking for her connected oil, and the Defendant was living together with C even after the instant lawsuit was filed, it can be sufficiently recognized that C committed an unlawful act with the knowledge that it was a pro-North, and the evidence No. 2 was insufficient to recognize it, and no other counter evidence exists).

Various circumstances revealed from the facts acknowledged by the evidence revealed earlier within the scope of liability for damages, i.e., the marriage period, marital life, family relationship, and fraudulent act of the Plaintiff and C.