1. The Defendant jointly with C, as to KRW 10,00,000, and as to this, shall be annually from April 3, 2019 to July 22, 2020.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and C are married couple who completed the marriage report on March 5, 2014, and have three children who are minors.

B. The Defendant became aware of C, while serving as a police assigned for special guard at a bank, and began to be in close connection with C from December 2018, and began to be in close relation with C.

C. On January 17, 2019, the Plaintiff and C applied for the confirmation of the intention of divorce by agreement with this Court No. 2019 Collaborat. 36, but the said application was withdrawn by the absence of the Plaintiff and C on April 23, 2019.

On January 22, 2019, the Plaintiff discovered that C divides between the Defendant and Kakaox, and concluded on January 22, 2019 that C was the spouse of C, and that C and Kakao was the Defendant.

E. In addition, on January 22, 2019, the Plaintiff, along with C’s omission on January 22, 2019, stated that the Defendant is called C and C by finding the Defendant again.

F. However, even though the Defendant introduced C to his mother as one’s own female-friendly group, the Defendant was friendly with C until the time when the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit.

[Reasons for Recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 15, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, voice and video (including serial numbers), the inquiry and reply to the Director of the District Court of Mountainous District, as a result of the inquiry and reply to the Director of the District Court of Mountainous District of this Court, part of witness C's testimony

2. Determination

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 by committing an unlawful act with the married couple, and infringing on his/her spouse’s right as a spouse, thereby causing emotional distress to the spouse constitutes a tort (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 2011Meu2997, Nov. 20, 2014). 2) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, in light of the facts acknowledged earlier, the Defendant continued to interfere with C even if he/she became aware that he/she is a spouse of C on January 22, 2019.