1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and D are legally married couple who completed the marriage report on October 29, 2002, and Defendant C was known to the members of D and School Governance Committee.

B. Defendant C introduced Defendant B to the end of April, 2017, and thereafter, Defendant B contacted Defendant B to telephone conversations or Kakaoooox several times until May 3, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there has been no dispute, each entry and video of Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and the purport of whole pleading

2. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion of the cause of the claim was known by Defendant C, even though he was a woman, she was aware that he was a woman, and was able to engage in an adultery by introducing Defendant B, the male father, and Defendant C attempted to divide sexual dialogue with D and commit an inter-competing act, such as promising to meet with D.

The above Defendants’ act constitutes a joint tort as stipulated in Article 840(1) of the Civil Act, and thereby, the Plaintiff suffered mental loss.

Therefore, the defendants are jointly obligated to pay 20,000,000 won to the plaintiff as consolation money.

3. The Defendants asserted that the instant claim was subject to exclusive jurisdiction over the Family Court on the premise that the said claim was a claim for damages under Articles 806(2) and 843 of the Civil Act.

However, there is no room to apply the above provision to the case where a judicial divorce or matrimonial engagement has been dissolved, and the plaintiff and D did not undergo judicial divorce procedures.

Therefore, the prior defense of the Defendants on different premise is without merit.

4. The judgment on the cause of the claim is based on the facts that the plaintiff and D were legally married couple, that the defendant C introduced the defendant Eul to the defendant, and the fact that the defendant B contacted the defendant Eul to telephone conversations or Kakaoox was based on the facts.

However, the dialogue between Defendant B and D is somewhat inappropriate because it is divided among the people who have a spouse, but it is so argued by the Plaintiff.