1. The Defendant’s KRW 15,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from November 15, 2016 to April 11, 2017 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff and C are legally married couple who completed the marriage report on June 26, 2001.

B. In around 2004, the Defendant came to know of C and C with the University Changdong around 2004, the Plaintiff promised to commit the crime against the Plaintiff and not to reconvert the Plaintiff.

C. However, in 2015, the Defendant developed B around 2015, into a tobacco relationship, from October 2015, and around September 2016, the Defendant was aware that C and Busan were accommodated in the hotel and was accommodated in C and the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 7, Eul evidence 1 (including additional number), the purport of whole pleadings

2. Occurrence and scope of liability for damages;

A. In principle, the act that a third party who is liable for damages causes mental pain to the spouse by committing an unlawful act with the spouse, thereby infringing on the common life of the married couple falling under the essence of marriage or interfering with the maintenance thereof and infringing on the spouse's right as the spouse.

(see Supreme Court Decision 201Meu2997, Nov. 20, 2014). “Cheating” in this context refers to a wider concept, including the adultery, that does not reach the common sense, but does not reach the common sense, and all unlawful acts that are not faithful to the husband and wife’s duty of mutual assistance may be included therein. Whether it is an unlawful act or not should be assessed in consideration of the degree and circumstances of the specific case.

(Supreme Court Decision 2010Meu4095 Decided November 28, 2013, etc.) In light of the aforementioned facts and legal principles, the Defendant, even though being aware that C is a spouse, committed an unlawful act, such as maintaining a relationship with C by maintaining a relationship with C, is deemed to have been committed.

Such unlawful act by the defendant is a tort that infringes on the common life of the couple between the plaintiff and C and infringes on the plaintiff's spouse's right as the plaintiff's spouse, and it is clear in light of the rule of experience that the plaintiff suffered considerable mental suffering.

Therefore, it is true.