1. The Defendant jointly with C (D) and jointly with the Plaintiff KRW 15,00,00,000, and the Defendant’s amount from August 6, 2019 to October 16, 2019.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff and C completed the marriage report on August 7, 2004, and have three minor children among them.

B. C came to know of the Defendant at the beginning of 2018 while studying at the Broadcasting and Communications University, and he was he up to the friendly.

C. C and the Defendant committed unlawful acts, such as adultery, while maintaining a friendly relationship, such as conducting one-day travel at the beginning of December 2018.

On December 15, 2018, the Plaintiff became aware of the illegal relationship between the Defendant and C, and demanded C to endeavor to recover home by continuing the relationship with the Defendant.

E. Around March 2019, the Defendant received hospitalization after undergoing a heart surgery, and the relationship between C and the Defendant continued around that time.

F. On July 19, 2019, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

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 Decided November 20, 2014). Also, tort liability borne by either spouse and a third party is jointly and severally liable as a joint tort.

(Supreme Court Decision 2013Meu2441 Decided May 29, 2015). The fact that the Defendant knowingly committed an illegal act with C with C despite being aware of his/her spouse’s existence is as seen earlier. Such an act by the Defendant is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff infringed upon the rights of the Plaintiff’s spouse as C, and it is clear in light of the empirical rule that the Plaintiff suffered a serious mental pain.

Therefore, the defendant, as the joint tortfeasor, has the obligation to compensate the plaintiff for the above mental damage.