1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and C are legally married couple who completed the marriage report on August 21, 2009.

B. The Defendant, as an employee of the store (BAR) operated by C, maintained the relationship with C from March 14, 2015, knowing that C is a father-Nam.

C. The Defendant committed unlawful acts, such as inter-competing with C while living in the studio received by C. Even after the Plaintiff became aware of the aforementioned circumstances, the Defendant followed the rest of C with C, and was aware of the Plaintiff at the Defendant’s studio.

The plaintiff and C are not divorced.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1-7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The act that a third party who is liable for damages causes mental distress to the spouse by infringing on or interfering with the common life of the married couple falling under the essence of marriage and infringing on the rights of the spouse as the spouse by committing an unlawful act with the spouse of the married couple constitutes tort in principle.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997 Decided November 20, 2014, etc.). Comprehensively taking account of the facts acknowledged earlier, it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant committed an unlawful act with the Plaintiff’s spouse, thereby infringing on the marital relationship between the Plaintiff and C or interfering with its maintenance, thereby suffering from mental pain to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to do so in money for mental damage suffered by the plaintiff.

B. Considering the various circumstances indicated in the argument of the instant case, such as the content, degree and period of the unlawful act committed by the Defendant and C, the degree and period of the said unlawful act, the impact of the Plaintiff’s marital relationship, the marriage period between the Plaintiff and C, and the Defendant’s relationship with C even after having followed C and C, it is reasonable to determine the amount of consolation money to be compensated by the Defendant to the Plaintiff as KRW 30,000,000.

Therefore, the defendant is charged with consolation money of KRW 30,000,000 to the plaintiff.