1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Defendants exceeding the money ordered to be paid under the following subparagraphs shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. D, after completing the marriage report with I on November 6, 2008, came to proceed with the divorce procedure from around 2010 while having been separated from the F (G).

B. D, while engaging in club activities, provided the Plaintiff with the premise of marriage from May 201 to May 201. Since August 201, upon being aware of the Plaintiff’s pregnancy, D had the Plaintiff lived together with the Plaintiff from August 20 to August.

C. Around that time, D and the Defendants (Defendant C’s female son) concealed the Plaintiff’s marriage experience and F was not the Plaintiff’s children but the Defendant C’s female son.

D The divorce conciliation has been concluded with I on September 2, 2011.

9.16. A declaration of divorce has been completed.

E. The Plaintiff suspected of having been aware that F would be a member of D, but maintained a de facto marriage relationship with D and the Defendants reliance on their false remarks, and on December 24, 2011, the Plaintiff got married with D and the Defendants.

F. On January 5, 2012, the Plaintiff became aware that F was a D’s child through genetic testing results; and

3. 16. After childbirth with D:

4.13. The report of marriage has been completed.

G. On February 8, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against D, including divorce and consolation money, with the Seoul Family Court Decision 2013Ddan10348, and was sentenced on June 25, 2014 to the effect that “D, after divorce, shall pay consolation money of KRW 30 million to the Plaintiff.”

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute; Gap's evidence 1, 2, 3, 9, 11, 20; purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendants concealed the fact that the Defendants were her children between the marriage experience of D and the former wife, and repeated the Plaintiff’s false statement as Defendant C’s married alien.

As such, the Defendants, by deceiving the Plaintiff, had the Plaintiff maintain de facto marriage with D and completed marriage.

In addition, the Defendants, during the marriage period, abused the Plaintiff, or inflicted pain on the Plaintiff with D without any economic ability, on the ground that the Plaintiff did not make the F as a self-fashion. Therefore, the Defendants were not the joint tortfeasor.