beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 5 million to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s 5% per annum from January 17, 2019 to February 6, 2020 and the following.
Reasons
1. The fact of recognition ① The Plaintiff is a legally married couple who completed the marriage report on May 30, 2010 with the non-party C (hereinafter “non-party”) and two minor children under his/her chain.
② Around September 2018, the Nonparty came to know of the Defendant, who was a post-university of the university, and frequently divided the Kakakaogle. Around December 2018, the Nonparty came to know of the Defendant, who was a post-university of the university, and was going to go to Jeju-do for three and four days on the following grounds: (a) around December 2018, the Nonparty came to know of the Defendant, who was a post-university of the university; and (b) around December 2018, the Nonparty came to go through the Nonparty by employing the Nonparty, and allowing the Nonparty to go
③ The Nonparty rejected the Plaintiff’s request to show the content of the Kakax dialogue with the Defendant, asserting that the Plaintiff did not have a sex relationship with the Defendant, up to now.
[Ground of appeal] Facts without dispute, Gap's 1 to 5 evidence (including additional number), Eul's testimony, and the purport of whole pleading
2. Determination
A. The act of a third party by committing an unlawful act with a spouse, thereby infringing on, or impeding the maintenance of, common life of the married couple falling under the essence of marriage and infringing on the spouse’s right as the spouse, thereby causing mental pain to the spouse constitutes a tort (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Meu2997, Nov. 20, 2014). As such, the Defendant was liable to compensate the Plaintiff for emotional distress suffered by the Plaintiff, since the non-party to whom the spouse is his/her spouse was his/her spouse and the non-party to whom the two traveld, etc.
B. The following circumstances are revealed with respect to the amount of consolation money to be paid by the Defendant, based on the health team, the above evidence, and the purport of the entire pleadings, namely, the Plaintiff’s life, such as staying in a married foreign country for more than half of one year for the purpose of evading the duty of military service after marriage with the Nonparty, etc., which also gave rise to a deviation from the Nonparty, and the Nonparty is deemed to have employed persons and caused them to go without action by the Nonparty.