1. The Defendant’s KRW 17,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from November 7, 2019 to October 7, 2020, respectively, to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a legally married couple who completed the marriage report with C on February 22, 2011.

The defendant was a member of a driving school working by C.

B. From September 10, 2019, the Defendant knew that he/she had a spouse, provided that he/she had a sexual intercourse with C, with the Defendant.

C sent out on October 19, 2019 due to the extinguishment with the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's 1 to 11, 18 evidence (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the above fact of recognition of the liability for damages, the defendant committed an unlawful act with C even though he knows that the defendant's spouse had a spouse. Since the defendant's act infringed upon the plaintiff's community life or interfered with the maintenance thereof, the defendant has a duty to pay mental suffering suffered by the plaintiff in money.

B. As to the amount of consolation money that the Defendant is liable to compensate, the amount of consolation money that the Defendant is liable to compensate for to the Plaintiff shall be determined as KRW 17 million, comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances shown in the argument of the instant case, such as health group, the content and degree of the Defendant and C’s unlawful act, the period, the marriage period and family relationship of the Plaintiff and C, the impact of the Defendant’s unlawful act on the Plaintiff’s marital life,

C. According to the theory of lawsuit, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff sought compensation for consolation money of KRW 17 million and damages for delay from November 7, 2019, the following day after the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case, which is the date of tort (the plaintiff claimed payment of damages for delay from September 10, 2019, which is the date of tort. However, the plaintiff's claim is a claim for consolation money for the whole period of misconduct, and there is no assertion or proof as to the termination date, and therefore, it is ordered to pay damages for delay from the day after the delivery of a copy of complaint of this case until October 7, 2020, which is the date of the decision of this case.)