1. The Defendant’s KRW 10,000,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from October 2, 2019 to August 18, 2020, respectively.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and Nonparty C are legally married couple who completed the marriage report on October 30, 2006.

B. On May 9, 2019, the Plaintiff discovered the fact that C, a spouse, has returned to the Defendant, and the Plaintiff and C were married.

C. On May 11, 2019, C sent a message to the Defendant to the effect that it drafted a divorce agreement with the Plaintiff, and C and the Defendant sent the message to the Defendant to the Hong Kong from May 25, 2019 to May 27, 2019, and to Vietnam from July 18, 2019 to July 22, 2019, respectively.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1-11, fact-finding response results by the Seoul Immigration Office, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. 1) In principle, a third party’s act of infringing on or impeding the maintenance of a married couple’s community life falling under the essence of marriage and infringing on his/her spouse’s right as the spouse by committing an unlawful act with the married couple, constitutes tort (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 2011Meu2997, Nov. 20, 2014). According to the above facts of recognition, even though the defendant knew that he/she is a spouse of C, it is recognized that he/she committed an unlawful act with C and thereby infringing on the Plaintiff’s community life or interfere with their maintenance, and that the Plaintiff suffered considerable mental suffering, it is obvious in light of the empirical rule that the defendant would be liable to pay consolation money for mental suffering suffered by the Plaintiff. 2) Accordingly, the defendant asserts to the purport that the defendant had already ceased to marital relationship from May 9, 2019 to October 8, 2019, and that there was no intention or negligence between C and the Defendant on May 1, 2019.