1. The defendant jointly with C (D) and jointly with C (20,000,000 won to the plaintiff and the plaintiff from June 26, 2020 to February 16, 2021.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

(a) If one side of the married couple commits an unlawful act, the other side of the married couple shall be liable to compensate for damages caused by a tort against the mental suffering which the spouse has sustained;

A third party shall not interfere with a married couple's communal living which corresponds to the nature of the marriage, such as intervening in a couple's communal living of another person and causing the failure of the couple's communal living.

In principle, a third party’s act of infringing on or impeding the maintenance of common life of the married couple falling under the essence of marriage by committing an unlawful act with the spouse, and infringing on the spouse’s rights as the spouse, and thereby causing mental pain to the spouse constitutes tort. tort liability borne by either spouse and the third party is one of the joint tort liability and is one of the subordinate joint tort liability (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Meu 2441, May 29, 2015). (b) Evidence Nos. 6, 7, 14, 15, and 16 of evidence Nos. 8 through 12 (including each number) written in Gap’s evidence No. 6, 3, and 8 through 12 (including each number), the plaintiff can be acknowledged as having committed an unlawful act, such as committing an improper act, by knowing that the spouse is a spouse C and the third party.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant suffered mental pain on the plaintiff by infringing on a couple's communal life falling under the essence of marriage or interfering with the maintenance thereof, and infringing on the plaintiff's spouse's right to communal living as the plaintiff's spouse.

Therefore, the defendant is jointly liable to compensate the plaintiff for mental damage caused by the above illegal act, in collaboration with C as a joint illegal act.

(c)

In regard to this, the defendant has been in a de facto failure of the relationship between the plaintiff and C before the defendant reached C, and therefore, the defendant's above act and the defendant's common life of the plaintiff and E are infringed or interfered with.