1. The Defendant’s KRW 20,000,000 as well as the annual rate of KRW 5% from December 27, 2017 to May 4, 2018 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 1, 2014, the Plaintiff is a legally married couple who completed the marriage report on May 1, 2014, and two married couple (D students and E students) are married.

B. The Defendant, despite being aware of the existence of a spouse, entered into an inhumane relationship by providing C with a teaching system with C, with the knowledge of the existence of a spouse.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry or image of Gap evidence 1 through 7 (including branch numbers for those with a satisfy number) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

(a) A third party who has a liability for damages shall not interfere with a married couple's community life falling under the nature of marriage, such as interfering with a couple's community life by interfering with another person's community life;

In principle, a third party's act of infringing on or interfering with a marital life falling under the essence of marriage by committing an unlawful act with either side of the married couple and causing mental pain to the spouse by infringing on the rights of the spouse as the spouse.

(See Supreme Court Decision 201Meu2997 Decided November 20, 2014 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Meu2997). “Cheating” in this context refers to a broad concept, including the adultery, that does not reach a common sense, but does not fulfill the duty of mutual assistance of both spouses, may include any unlawful act, and whether it constitutes an unlawful act ought to be evaluated in consideration of the degree and circumstances of the specific case.

(See Supreme Court Decision 88Meu7 delivered on May 24, 198, and 92Meu68 delivered on November 10, 1992, etc.). According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant committed an unlawful act continuously for a certain period with knowledge that C is a spouse, and the defendant's act constitutes a tort that causes mental pain to the plaintiff by infringing upon the plaintiff's community life or interfering with the maintenance thereof, and infringing the plaintiff's right as the spouse.

Therefore, the defendant will have the mental damage suffered by the plaintiff due to an illegal act in money.