1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff) filed by this court shall be dismissed.

2. The following payments, among the judgments of the first instance.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 18, 199, the Plaintiff and two children were legally married couple who completed the marriage report on February 18, 199.

B. Around 2011, the Defendant began with C, and maintained internal relations, such as having sexual intercourses with C, even after receiving a claim against internal relations from the Plaintiff on September 2016, by January 15, 2017.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9, 14, and 15, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the main claim

(a) A third party who has a liability for damages shall not interfere with a married couple's communal life falling under the nature of marriage, such as interfering with a married couple's communal life by interfering with another person's communal life;

In principle, a third party's act of infringing on or interfering with a marital life falling under the essence of marriage by committing an unlawful act with either side of the married couple and causing mental pain to the spouse by infringing on the rights of the spouse as the spouse.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2013Meu2441 Decided May 29, 2015). According to the above facts, the Defendant, who committed an unlawful act by the Plaintiff’s spouse from around 2011 to January 15, 2017, may sufficiently be recognized to have inflicted emotional distress on the Plaintiff by infringing the Plaintiff’s communal life between the Plaintiff and C, interfering with their maintenance, and infringing the Plaintiff’s right as the spouse. Thus, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for emotional distress inflicted upon the Plaintiff.

(A) Around September 1, 2016, there is no evidence to prove that the Defendant was aware of the fact that C was a son. However, the Defendant maintained the internal relationship with C even until January 15, 2017, whichever was later, and such an act of the Defendant is obvious that the act of the Defendant constitutes tort against the Plaintiff, and such circumstance is considered in determining the amount of consolation money.

. Liability for damages.