beta
Text
The defendant's KRW 15,00,000 for the plaintiff and its 5% per annum from May 15, 2020 to March 17, 2021, and the following.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is a legally married couple who completed the marriage report with C on December 2002, and two children who are minors.
B. On October 2012, the Defendant resided in Busan by the issuance of a local government around October 2012
C was first known at the church sexual ties.
The Defendant, despite being aware of C’s marriage, received a gift from around 2017, from around C, and received a message of almost daily sharing via C and mobile phones from the end of the end of May 14, 2019 to May 14, 2020, and maintained an unlawful relationship, such as referring C to or wanting to see “h”, and making several calls a day (C stored the Defendant’s phone number in its mobile phone in another name, such as D” and “E head,” etc.). [Grounds for recognition] There is no dispute over the fact that the Defendant’s phone number is stored in one’s mobile phone, as indicated in subparagraphs 1, 3, and 7, and the purport of the entire pleadings, as a whole.
2. Determination
(a) The husband or wife of a liability for damages bears the duty of good faith not to engage in any unlawful act, and at this time, such duty of good faith;
The term "until they reach the marital relationship" includes all unlawful acts that are not faithful to the marital duty of the married couple. If one of the married couple commits an unlawful act, the married couple shall be liable to compensate for the mental suffering suffered by the spouse (see Supreme Court Decision 87Meu5, 87Meu6, May 26, 1987, etc.). Meanwhile, the third party shall not interfere with the common life of the married couple falling under the nature of the marriage by intervening in the common life of the married couple, and the third party shall not interfere with the common life of the married couple falling under the nature of the marriage or interfere with the maintenance thereof, and by infringing upon the rights as the spouse and thereby causing mental suffering to the spouse, in principle, constitutes a tort (see Supreme Court Decision 87Meu5, May 29, 2015).