1. The Defendant’s KRW 15,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from August 25, 2018 to February 13, 2019 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and C are legal married couple who completed the marriage report on September 27, 2007, and have children D (Nam, 2009), E (Nam, 2013), F (Nam, 2017).

B. The Defendant, despite being aware of the spouse’s existence, maintained the illegality of the relationship between C and C from around 2017 to June 2018, including having sexual intercourse.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries and images of Gap evidence 1 through 9 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to 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 2011Meu2997, Nov. 20, 2014). According to the above facts, the Defendant, even though being aware that C is a spouse, maintained a badial relationship with C, by maintaining a sexual intercourse with C for a considerable period of time with the knowledge that C was a spouse, thereby committing a tort against the Plaintiff. Such tort by the Defendant is deemed to have infringed upon, or interfered with, the Plaintiff’s marital relationship. Therefore, the Defendant is obliged to pay emotional distress suffered by the Plaintiff in money.

B. The defendant's argument regarding the defendant's assertion is asserted that the defendant's communal living between the plaintiff and C was in distress at the time of delivery of C, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it, and the defendant's above assertion is not accepted.

C. As to the amount of consolation money that the Defendant is liable to compensate, the Defendant comprehensively takes into account all the circumstances shown in the pleadings of the instant case, including health group, the content and degree of the commission of the Defendant and C, the marriage and family relationship between the Plaintiff and C, and the Defendant’s wrongful act.