1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 7,000,000 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Plaintiff’s payment thereof from May 25, 2017 to August 22, 2018.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and C are legally married couple who completed the marriage report on April 23, 2014, and two children (2014, 2016, 2016) are under the chain.

B. C was in attendance at the D branch of the Gyeonggi University. On March 2, 2017, the Defendant, a new student admitted to the same division of the same university, was known.

C. In a well-known state that C has a spouse, the Defendant followed C and C’s ex post facto distribution relationship. From April 8, 2017, the Defendant developed into a tobacco relationship with C and retired from the Gyeonggi University on September 7, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 13, Eul evidence 2 (including additional number), the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination on the main claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that C had a spouse was aware of the fact that C had a spouse, and caused mental pain to the Plaintiff, so the Defendant is obligated to pay consolation money of KRW 31 million and delay damages to the Plaintiff.

B. In principle, a third party's act of infringing on or interfering with a couple's communal life falling under the essence of marriage and infringing on a spouse's right as a spouse and causing mental pain to the spouse by committing an unlawful act with the spouse of the spouse constitutes a tort.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997 Decided November 20, 2014, etc.). According to the foregoing recognition in the instant case, it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant committed an act with the Plaintiff’s spouse, thereby infringing a matrimonial relationship between the Plaintiff and C, or interfering with its maintenance, thereby suffering mental pain on the Plaintiff. As such, the Defendant is obliged to pay a monetary reward for emotional distress suffered by the Plaintiff.

Furthermore, with respect to the amount of damages, the defendant and C, recognized by each of the above evidence, have sustained period and degree of fraudulent act, influence of the fraudulent act on the plaintiff's marital life, and the plaintiff.