beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 25,00,000, and its interest thereon, shall be 5% per annum from December 20, 2019 to April 21, 2020, and the following.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is a person who completed the marriage report with C on August 20, 2007.
The plaintiff has one child (year 2009) between C and C.
B. From June 2019, the Defendant: (a) known that C is a spouse of C from June 2019; and (b) conspired with C.
C. The Defendant, while teaching with C, received approximately KRW 60 million from June 2019 to November 2019 from C, and had C cover the vehicle, laundry, etc., and used the vehicle, laundry, etc. and received economic assistance, such as using the goods, such as laundry.
In addition, even though the defendant was found to have a teaching system with C around November 2019, the defendant continued to follow the teaching system with C and continued to meet with C, and discussed countermeasures against the plaintiff.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 4, 5, 7 through 11, 13 through 16, and 18 through 30, Gap evidence 3, 6, 12, and 17, each video and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. 1) The act of a third party as to the cause of the claim, which infringes on or interferes with the common life of the married couple falling under the essence of the marriage and infringes on the rights of the spouse as the spouse, thereby causing mental pain to the spouse, in principle, constitutes tort.
(B) According to the above facts, the defendant committed an unlawful act with C while being aware that he/she is a spouse, and thereby infringed or interfered with the maintenance of the marital life with C. Thus, he/she is liable to compensate for mental suffering suffered by the plaintiff. (2) As to the defendant's assertion, the defendant's marital relationship with the defendant C had already been broken down at the time when he/she associates with the plaintiff, and thus, the causal relationship between the defendant's unlawful act and the plaintiff's mental suffering is not recognized.