1. The defendant shall pay 50,000,000 won to the plaintiff and 12% per annum from February 20, 2020 to the day of complete payment.

The plaintiff's assertion is a married couple on January 25, 1983, who is a summary of the plaintiff's argument.

The defendant committed unlawful acts with C, thereby causing mental damage to the plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay consolation money for mental damage to the plaintiff.

Judgment

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the statements and videos (including branch numbers) of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the plaintiff is a legally married couple who reported the marriage on Jan. 25, 1983, the plaintiff and Eul have two children (1981, 1988) between Eul and Eul, and the defendant, together with Eul, entered the officetels or parked in the officetels in which the defendant is living together with Eul and entered it several times.

According to the above facts, it is reasonable to view that the defendant suffered mental loss from the plaintiff by doing an illegal act with C or by doing at least a sufficient suspicion of illegal act.

(The defendant alleged that he was friendly with friendship C, etc., but there was no fact that he did an illegal act with C, but he did not appear in this court and did not submit any materials to confirm his own assertion. Therefore, the defendant is obliged to pay consolation money to the plaintiff as compensation for mental damage.

Considering the duration of marital life, family relationship, age, occupation, etc. between the Plaintiff and C as indicated in the above recognition scope of liability for damages, in particular, the Defendant did not have any attitude to specifically dispute the Plaintiff’s assertion, and the Plaintiff and his children are deemed to have received the upper part of the token due to the illegal act committed by the Defendant and C, etc., the Plaintiff’s claim is recognized as consolation money, in consideration of all the circumstances revealed in the argument in the instant case.

According to the theory of theory of lawsuit, the defendant.