The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Plaintiff’s assertion

Since the Defendant knew of his spouse’s existence, from June 2018 to June 3, 2018, knew of the fact that C had a spouse, she drying the new wall, she drying at a so set soup and drying, together with locked, and committed a tort causing mental pain to C’s spouse, thereby causing emotional distress to the Plaintiff, the Defendant is obligated to pay consolation money of KRW 30,000,100 as well as damages for delay to the Plaintiff.

Judgment

A. According to the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the plaintiff and C may recognize the fact that they reported their marriage on October 20, 1993.

B. In principle, a third party's act of infringing on a couple's communal life falling under the essence of marriage or interfering with the maintenance thereof and infringing on a spouse's right as the spouse, thereby causing mental pain to the spouse constitutes a tort.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2013Meu2441 Decided May 29, 2015, and Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997 Decided November 20, 2014). Meanwhile, “illegal conduct by a spouse” under Article 840 Subparag. 1 of the Civil Act is a broad concept including the adultery, and does not reach a common sense, but includes any unlawful conduct that is not faithful to the marital duty (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Meu4095, Nov. 28, 2013).

In the case of this case, it is difficult to believe that part of the Gap evidence No. 5 stating that "C has committed an unlawful act and relation with the defendant," as it is in light of the statements No. 3, and it is insufficient to recognize that some of the statements of No. 3-1, No. 2, No. 6, and No. 7, and Gap evidence No. 5 were entered into an unlawful act, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.