1. The plaintiff's appeal and the defendant's incidental appeal are all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal and the incidental costs of appeal shall be individually considered.

1. The act, in principle, of infringing on a married couple's communal life falling under the essence of marriage or interfering with the maintenance thereof and infringing on the right as the spouse's spouse by a third party who has a liability for damages caused mental pain to the spouse by committing an unlawful act with the spouse of the married couple;

(2) The Plaintiff and C are legally married who completed a marriage report around February 16, 2010 (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2011Meu2997, Nov. 20, 201). The Defendant, despite being aware that C is his/her spouse, committed an unlawful act, such as having a sexual intercourse with C from August 2015 to February 2016, and thereby having been pregnant, may be recognized in full view of the purport of arguments and arguments in each of the statements and videos stated in subparagraphs 1 through 8, and 12 through 16 (including the number of branch numbers). According to the above acknowledged facts, since the Defendant violated the Plaintiff’s community life by committing an unlawful act with C and his/her spouse, obstructed the Plaintiff’s maintenance thereof, and infringed the Plaintiff’s spouse’s right, thereby suffering mental suffering, the Defendant is obligated to do so with respect to the Plaintiff’s emotional suffering.

2. In full view of all the circumstances indicated in the records and arguments of the instant case including the period during which the Defendant and C committed a fraudulent act, the method or degree of the fraudulent act, the Defendant’s attitude after the fraudulent act, the period of marriage between the Plaintiff and C and the degree of impact on the marriage between the Plaintiff and C, etc., it is reasonable to determine the amount of consolation money to be paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiff as seven million won.

Therefore, the defendant from May 26, 2016, which was the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case, to the plaintiff, as the plaintiff seeks.