beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 20,000,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual interest from June 20, 2019 to January 16, 2020, and the following.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The plaintiff is a legal couple who completed the marriage report on March 14, 1992 with C.
B. On March 21, 2016, after the Defendant first known C, on December 23, 2017, the Defendant continued to maintain the Buddhist relationship by entering into a sexual intercourse with C, etc. with the Plaintiff on the grounds that he/she had a sexual intercourse with C, and maintained the inhuman relationship with the Plaintiff, such as having a sexual intercourse over several occasions even after having affected the inhuman relationship, and on July 28, 2018, the Defendant prepared a confirmation letter to the effect that “The Plaintiff shall have a special care to ensure that the Plaintiff does not cause any subsequent occurrence.”
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 13 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. 1) A third party’s liability for damages does not interfere with a married couple’s communal life falling under the essence of marriage by intervening in a married couple’s communal life of another person and causing failure of a married couple’s communal life. A third party’s act of infringing on or maintaining a married couple’s communal life falling under the essence of marriage by committing an unlawful act with one of the married couple, and thereby infringing on the spouse’s right as the spouse and causing emotional distress to the spouse (Supreme Court en banc Decision 2011Meu2997 Decided November 20, 2014), in principle, constitutes tort (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Meu2997, Nov. 20, 201). According to the above fact-finding, the defendant committed unlawful act, such as entering into a sexual relationship with C even though he/she is well aware that it has a marital relationship with C, thereby infringing on the Plaintiff’s spouse’s right as the spouse of the Plaintiff, and as such, it is obvious that the Plaintiff suffered considerable mental distress due to the Defendant’s unlawful act.
B. The scope of the liability for damages and the Plaintiff C.