1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 10,000,000 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Plaintiff’s objection thereto from May 26, 2016 to December 1, 2017.

1. The principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed to exist;

A. The plaintiff is a husband and wife who completed the marriage report on October 5, 1995.

B. On October 2015, C and the Defendant sent a text message stating that the Plaintiff was the husband of C and that the Plaintiff was no longer the husband of C on February 22, 2016.

C. From February 22, 2016 to April 14, 2016, the Defendant continued to provide C and Kakakao Stockholm messages, and C sent the Plaintiff a Kakao Stockholm message with the content that the Defendant had sexual intercourses with the Defendant around April 2016.

On April 15, 2016, the Plaintiff stated on the wall advertisement of the Plaintiff’s school operated by the Defendant “Inhumane, Madex, Madex,” and stated on the front door of the entrance of the said school “influence the door of the private teaching institute fluence flusium,” and stated on the front of the entrance of the said private teaching institute “influsium flusium,” thereby insulting the Defendant and damaging the Defendant’s property.

“Along with the criminal facts, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 1 million on June 22, 2017 (Seoul Southern District Court 2017Seoul Southern District Court 553). The Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 2 million on September 26, 2017, as the crime of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc., that “from April 16, 2016 to 00:17 to 02:00,000 won, the Defendant found the Plaintiff’s private teaching institute operated by himself/herself and sent a text message causing uneasiness on the Plaintiff’s mobile phone by using a cell phone,” and was sentenced to a crime of violation of the Act on Promotion, etc. of Information

(Reasons for Recognition) The facts that there is no dispute over the Seoul District Court's Ansan Branch 2017 Go-Ma344. [Ground for Recognition], Gap's Evidence Nos. 1, 2, 14, Eul's Evidence Nos. 10, C's witness statement, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination as to the claim on the principal lawsuit

A. The third party who suffered the liability for damages infringes on or maintains a married couple’s communal living which is equivalent to the nature of marriage by committing an unlawful act with the married couple.