1. The Defendant’s KRW 20,000,000 as well as 5% per annum from December 31, 2015 to September 22, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. A third party whose responsibility is established shall not interfere with a married couple’s community life, which corresponds to the nature of the marriage, such as interfering with a couple’s community life by causing a failure of the married couple’s community life.

In principle, a third party's act of infringing on or interfering with a couple's communal life falling under the essence of marriage by committing an unlawful act with either side of the married couple and causing mental suffering by infringing on his/her spouse's right as the spouse.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2013Meu2441 Decided May 29, 2015, etc.). Comprehensively taking account of the purport (including a fact that there is no dispute) of Gap evidence 1 through 3, Gap evidence 5-1 through 3 as well as the purport of the entire pleadings, the defendant sent and received text messagess beyond the ordinary scope with the plaintiff's husband C, who is the plaintiff's husband, and the defendant was able to do so between November 19, 2012 and 22:3:30 on November 19, 2012 during the period of travel to the United States during which the plaintiff was traveling, the defendant was satis in the plaintiff's house with C, and the defendant was satis in the "Datur" located in Jin, as well as C around March 6, 2015.

In light of the above circumstances, the defendant can continue to confirm that he/she had committed a fraudulent act with C before November 19, 2012, and it is insufficient to reverse such ratification by only the descriptions of the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and there is no counter-proof otherwise.

Therefore, the defendant's above act constitutes an unlawful act that infringes on or interferes with the maintenance of a marital life between the plaintiff and C, and an act that infringes on the plaintiff's right as his spouse and thereby causes mental suffering, and thus, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for such damage

B. Regarding the amount of consolation money to be paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiff, the argument in the instant case including health team, the specific form and period of the Defendant’s wrongful act, the Defendant’s attitude after the fraudulent act, and the period of marital life between the Plaintiff and C.