beta
Text
1. The defendant jointly with C (D) and jointly with C (C) to KRW 10,00,000, and the plaintiff as to this, from June 16, 2020 to December 15, 2020.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff and C are legal couple who completed the marriage report on June 18, 2018 and has one child among them.
B. From December 2014 to December 2015, the Defendant: (a) was a person who had a relationship with C from December 2014 to December 2015; and (b) was aware that C had a spouse, and (c) was in school with C from November 201
C. On November 25, 2019 and December 11, 2019, the Defendant sent text messages to the Plaintiff to the effect that the Defendant was accommodated in C and her mother, and that the Plaintiff was aware of a wrongful act with C.
[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, entries and videos of Gap evidence 1 to 11 (including additional numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. The act that a third party who is liable for damages causes mental pain to the spouse by committing an unlawful act with the spouse of the married couple, thereby infringing on the common life of the married couple falling under the essence of the marriage or interfering with the maintenance thereof and infringing on the spouse's right as the spouse, constitutes tort in principle.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2011Meu2997, Nov. 20, 2014). According to the above facts, the Defendant knowingly committed an unlawful act with C with knowledge that C is a spouse, and thereby infringed upon the common life of the Plaintiff and C, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay emotional distress suffered by the Plaintiff in money.
(B) The Defendant asserts to the effect that, inasmuch as the marital relationship, such as the Plaintiff’s separation from the Plaintiff, is the actual failure of the marital relationship, and only reliance upon C and C have been committed, it cannot be deemed that the Plaintiff and C have caused the issue of the marriage dissolution, etc. between the Plaintiff and C. However, insofar as it is obvious that C and C had committed a wrongful act after recognizing the fact that C was in a marital relationship with the Plaintiff, the above circumstance alleged by the Defendant cannot be exempted from liability for damages against the Plaintiff).
The scope of liability for damages and the defendant are about the amount of consolation money.