The defendant shall pay 15,00,000 won to the plaintiff and 5% per annum from March 15, 2019 to August 26, 2020 and the next day.

Facts of recognition

A. The Plaintiff is a legally married couple who completed the marriage report with C on May 9, 2013, and has one child among them.

B. The Defendant, despite being aware of the fact that C was a legally spouse, maintained improper relations, such as engaging in a sexual intercourse with C with a private person, from March 2017 to early 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The act that a third party who is liable for damages causes mental distress to the spouse by infringing on or interfering with the common life of the married couple falling under the essence of marriage and infringing on the rights of the spouse as the spouse by committing an unlawful act with the spouse of the married couple constitutes a tort in principle.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997 Decided November 20, 2014, etc.). According to the aforementioned facts, the Defendant, even though having knowledge that C is a spouse, committed an unlawful act with C, thereby infringing upon the Plaintiff’s community life or interfering with the maintenance thereof, and infringing on the Plaintiff’s right as the spouse, barring any special circumstance, is obliged to engage in the Plaintiff’s emotional distress.

B. Considering the marriage period and family relation between the Plaintiff and C, the degree and period of fraudulent act, the influence of the said fraudulent act on the Plaintiff’s marital life and other circumstances revealed in the argument of this case, it is reasonable to determine the amount of consolation money to be paid to the Plaintiff by the Defendant as KRW 15,00,000.

Therefore, the defendant's 15,00,000 won and its corresponding 15,000 won, as the plaintiff seeks after the date of tort, shall be 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act from March 15, 2019 to August 26, 2020, which is the date of this decision, deemed reasonable for the defendant to resist the existence and scope of the obligation.