1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 8,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from November 15, 2018 to February 4, 2020 and the next day.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a person who was in a marital relationship with C.

B. The Plaintiff asserted that “the Defendant caused emotional distress to the Plaintiff, who is his spouse, by committing an unlawful act with C,” and filed a lawsuit claiming consolation money against the Defendant (Sacheon District Court 2017Da249195, hereinafter “the prior suit”).

In the foregoing case, the following decision of recommending reconciliation was rendered, and on July 5, 2018, the above decision of recommending reconciliation became final and conclusive on the grounds that the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not raise any objection.

1. The Defendant shall pay 14,00,000 won to the Plaintiff until August 31, 2018. If the Defendant fails to pay the above amount by the payment date, the Defendant shall pay the unpaid amount plus damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the day following the payment date to the day of full payment.

2. While the marriage between the plaintiff and the non-party C (D) continues, the defendant does not have contact with C in advance or have contact with C.

If the defendant violates the above obligations, he shall pay to the plaintiff 1,000,000 won per time.

[Ground for Recognition: Unsatisfy Facts, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 3, purport of whole pleadings]

2. The parties' assertion

A. Plaintiff 1) Since the Defendant continued to engage in a fraudulent act with C even after the decision to recommend a compromise, the Defendant is obligated to pay consolation money to the Plaintiff. (2) In preparation for the dismissal of the claim for damages as the decision to recommend a compromise was determined as the scheduled damages, the Defendant filed a preliminary claim for the grant of execution clause for the enforcement of Paragraph 2 of the decision to recommend a compromise.

B. Defendant 1) The Plaintiff and C’s marital relationship were in distress before the Defendant met C. 2) The primary claim is claiming consolation money recognized in the final and conclusive settlement recommendation decision, thereby going against res judicata.

3. Judgment on the main claim

A. Paragraph 2 of the decision to recommend reconciliation in the prior suit as to whether it conflicts with res judicata is with C.