1. The Defendant’s KRW 15,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from September 26, 2017 to February 13, 2018 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 12, 1994, the plaintiff and the non-party C are legally married couple who reported marriage and have two children under the chain.

B. The Defendant committed an unlawful act, such as being aware of a person who was married with the Plaintiff and was married to the said Plaintiff, with C’s teaching system from December 2, 2015, and having several inappropriate remainings.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 7 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The act that a third party of the relevant legal doctrine infringes on or interferes with a couple's communal life falling under the essence of marriage and infringes on a spouse's right as the spouse, thereby causing mental pain to the spouse, in principle, constitutes a tort.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997 Decided November 20, 2014 (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2011Meu2997). In addition, “illegal act by a spouse” under Article 840 Subparag. 1 of the Civil Act includes a wider concept, including the adultery, and includes any unlawful act that does not reach the common sense but does not fulfill the duty of mutual assistance of the husband and wife (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 88Meu7, May 24, 198). Whether it is an unlawful act ought to be evaluated in consideration of the degree and circumstances of each specific

(Supreme Court Decision 2010Meu4095 Decided November 28, 2013). B.

Judgment

1) In light of the above legal principles, the Defendant, even though he was aware that C is a spouse, committed an unlawful act, such as continuing to meet the Plaintiff’s husband and wife’s life from December 2015, and such an act was committed by the Defendant, and it is obvious in light of the empirical rule that the Plaintiff suffered a considerable amount of mental suffering, and thus, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for emotional distress. 2)