1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 20,000,000 as well as 5% per annum from March 25, 2020 to August 12, 2020.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff and C are legally married couple who completed the marriage report on June 5, 199, and have two children in 202 and 2004 under the sus.

B. Around 2019, the Defendant came to know while attending the Broadcasting and Communications University, and entered into an inhumane relationship with C and his/her spouse with the knowledge that he/she is a person with C and his/her spouse.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 to 4, Eul 1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

(a) A third party whose liability for damages is constituted shall not interfere with a married life falling under the nature of 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 Decision 2004Da1899 Decided May 13, 2005, etc.). As seen earlier, the Defendant, even though being aware that C was a spouse, committed an act that infringes upon and interferes with the maintenance of the community life of both the Plaintiff and C by maintaining an inappropriate relationship with D from the end of the end of 2019, while maintaining a sexual intercourse with D, etc. with the knowledge that C was a spouse. As such, it is obvious in light of the empirical rule that the Plaintiff suffered emotional distress due to the above Defendant’s tort, and thus, the Defendant

(A) Around November 2016, the Defendant asserts that the marriage between C and the Plaintiff has already been broken down to the extent that it is impossible to recover, but the evidence submitted by the Defendant alone is insufficient to recognize it, and there is no other counter-proof.

With respect to the amount of consolation money within the scope of liability for damages, the period of fraudulent act between the defendant and C, which is recognized by the aforementioned evidence and the purport of the whole pleadings, and the circumstances in which the defendant caused C to commit a fraudulent act.