1. The Defendant’s KRW 15,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from July 10, 2016 to January 19, 2017 to the Plaintiff.

1. A claim for damages;

A. In full view of the respective descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including each number), and the overall purport of arguments, the following facts are recognized:

(1) After completing the marriage report on June 5, 2001 with C, the Plaintiff has one minor child (born in 2007) under the chain, and has maintained the marital life up to now.

(2) The Defendant committed an unlawful act such as continuously communicating with C from November 201 to September 2015 by being aware that C had a spouse by marriage.

(b) A third party shall not interfere with a marital life which corresponds to the nature of the marriage, such as intervening in a marital life of another person and causing a failure of the marital life;

In principle, a third party's act of infringing on a couple's communal life falling under the essence of marriage or interfering with the maintenance thereof and infringing on the right as the spouse's right to it and causing mental pain to the spouse shall constitute a tort.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997 Decided November 20, 2014, etc.). According to the aforementioned legal principles and the aforementioned facts of recognition, the Defendant’s above act constitutes a tort against the Plaintiff, and thereby, is apparent in light of the empirical rule that the Plaintiff had suffered considerable mental suffering, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to compensate for mental damage suffered by the Plaintiff.

2. Considering the various circumstances revealed in the pleadings of the instant case, including health group, the period of marriage between the Plaintiff and C, the period of fraudulent act between the Defendant and C, and the contents of the relevant case (In Incheon District Court Decision 2015DaDa235550), as to the amount of consolation money, it is reasonable to determine the amount of consolation money as KRW 15,00,000.

3. Accordingly, according to the conclusion, the defendant is from July 10, 2016, which is the day following the delivery date of the copy of the complaint in this case, as sought by the plaintiff, as the plaintiff was paid consolation money of KRW 15,00,000 to the plaintiff as well as after the date of tort.