1. The Defendant’s KRW 15 million and the Plaintiff’s annual interest from September 30, 2017 to December 8, 2017.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 26, 2012, the Plaintiff and C have two minor children under the chain of law as the married couple who completed the marriage report on October 26, 2012.

B. On September 2010, the Defendant became aware of C with the same company fees. From February 2016 to July 2017, the Defendant, despite being aware of the fact that C is a prone male, provided frequent communications through message or telephone call, maintained an inappropriate relationship, such as having sexual intercourse.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 11, Eul evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. A. 1) A third party’s liability for damages shall not interfere with a married couple’s community life falling under the essence of marriage by intervening in a married couple’s community life. A third party’s act of infringing on or maintaining a married couple’s community life falling under the essence of marriage by committing an unlawful act with the married couple, and infringing on the spouse’s right as the spouse, thereby causing emotional distress to the spouse (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997, Nov. 20, 2014). “Cheating” in this case constitutes tort in principle (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Meu2997, Nov. 20, 201). “Cheating” is a broad concept that includes adultery, but does not reach the adultery, but is not faithful to the husband’s duty of good faith, and whether a third party is an unlawful act shall be evaluated in consideration of the degree and circumstances depending on specific cases (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 8Meu7, May 24, 19882).