2. The extension has been made in the first instance.

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant had committed a tort against the Plaintiff due to the fact that it had been committed with C, the husband of the Plaintiff for a long time, the maintenance of internal relations, etc., and due to this, the Plaintiff suffered serious mental pain, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay consolation money of KRW 30,000,000 and damages for delay corresponding to the above mental suffering as compensation for damages caused by the tort.

B. In full view of the purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 7 and Eul evidence Nos. 3, the defendant can be found to have committed an unlawful act, such as maintaining the relationship with the plaintiff's husband C for about seven to eight years from around 2007 to November 2015, while maintaining the relationship with the plaintiff's husband C, and making a liver. No. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 2-1, 2, 4, and 5, and part of evidence Nos. 3 are not interfered with and there is no counter-proof. The above act of the defendant is deemed to constitute a tort against the plaintiff, who is the wife, and since it is evident in light of the empirical rule that the plaintiff suffered a considerable mental suffering due to the defendant's above unlawful act, the defendant is liable to pay consolation money equivalent to mental suffering caused by the plaintiff's tort. Furthermore, with respect to the amount of consolation money, the amount of the defendant's health bond, the circumstances surrounding the marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant's entire 30 years and the circumstances.

Therefore, the defendant seeks consolation money of KRW 10,000,000 from the plaintiff as the plaintiff's tort after the defendant's tort.