1. The Defendant’s KRW 10,000,000 and its related amount are 5% per annum from June 27, 2019 to January 10, 2020 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff C and the legal couple who completed the marriage report on December 7, 2000, are two children (the married couple in 2001 and the newborn baby in 2005).

B. Around September 2018, the Defendant: (a) came to know of “D” E as a member; and (b) made sexual intercourses; and (c) made sexual intercourses.

C. Upon the Plaintiff’s filing of the instant lawsuit, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a text message showing that the Plaintiff was aware of the sexual intercourse with C at the end of June, 2019, and recognized it in the Plaintiff and telephone calls.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's evidence 1, Gap's evidence 3, Gap's evidence 5 through Gap's evidence 7 (including branch numbers), the contents of the voice files, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. The act that a third party who is liable for damages infringes on a couple's communal life falling under the essence of marriage or interferes with the maintenance thereof and infringes on a spouse's right as the spouse and thereby inflict mental pain on the spouse constitutes a tort in principle.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2013Meu2441 Decided May 29, 2015, etc.). According to the aforementioned facts, the Defendant committed unlawful acts, such as having sexual intercourse with C even though he/she is aware that he/she is a spouse of C, and it is obvious in light of the empirical rule that the Plaintiff was suffering from mental pain due to such unlawful acts by the Defendant, and thus, the Defendant is liable for compensating the Plaintiff for emotional distress caused by such unlawful acts

The defendant delivered a duplicate of the complaint of this case to the defendant's home and it became difficult for the defendant's husband to become aware of the fact that the defendant's husband was brought a lawsuit, and the plaintiff added his husband to the defendant without any ground, and the plaintiff confirmed that he was sexual intercourse with C in order to play the plaintiff, and it does not recognize a fraudulent act between C and C in a genuine manner. Thus, the above text messages or telephone content alone is nothing more than C.