손해배상(기)
1. The defendant's KRW 10,000,00 and about this, 5% per annum from January 10, 2020 to August 13, 2020 to the plaintiff.
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. In principle, a third party's act of infringing on or interfering with a couple's communal life falling under the essence of marriage by committing an unlawful act with the spouse, and infringing on the spouse's right as the spouse, thereby causing mental pain to the spouse constitutes a tort.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Da1899 Decided May 13, 2005, and Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997 Decided November 20, 2014, etc.) B.
Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the Plaintiff and C are the married couple who completed the marriage report on April 26, 2012, and the Defendant was aware that C was married to the Plaintiff on October 19, 2019, and was aware of the marital relationship with C, and had sexual intercourses from around that time to November 4, 2019.
The defendant's unlawful act constitutes a tort against the plaintiff, and it is clear in light of the empirical rule that the plaintiff suffered a considerable mental suffering. Thus, the defendant is obliged to pay the plaintiff a monetary suffering to the plaintiff due to the above unlawful act.
C. As to this, the Defendant asserts to the effect that the Plaintiff’s and C’s marital life had not been caused by C and C, and thus, it does not constitute a tort against the Plaintiff.
However, there is no dispute between the parties as to the fact that the Plaintiff filed an application for divorce at C’s request on November 4, 2019. However, it is difficult to conclude that the common life of the Plaintiff and C was in a state of bankruptcy on October 2019. Thus, the Defendant’s above assertion is rejected.
With respect to the amount of consolation money that the Defendant is liable to compensate for to the Plaintiff, the amount of consolation money that the Defendant is liable to compensate shall be KRW 10,000,00, considering the health class, the marriage period between the Plaintiff and C, the degree of misconduct between the Defendant and C, the impact of the Defendant’s act on the