1. The Defendant’s KRW 15,00,000 as well as annual 5% from November 4, 2019 to June 19, 2020 to the Plaintiff.

1. The following facts are found to be of no dispute between the Parties, or to be recognized in full view of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence of Nos. 1 to 7, 9, and 10 (including evidence with serial numbers):

A. The Plaintiff and C are legally married couple who completed the marriage report on June 23, 2011, and have two minor children under the chain.

B. From around 2018, the Defendant has been aware that C is a legally spouse, and has maintained a ties by running a hotel with the knowledge that C is a person with a spouse.

2. In principle, an act of a third party who causes mental distress to the spouse by infringing on a marital life falling under the essence of marriage or interfering with the maintenance thereof and infringing on the right as the spouse by committing an unlawful act with the spouse of the married couple, constitutes a tort;

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997, Nov. 20, 2014). Meanwhile, “illegal act” under Article 840 subparag. 1 of the Civil Act includes any act that is not faithful to the duty of good faith as a spouse, but is a broad concept rather than the so-called “illegal act” and “illegal act” ought to be evaluated in consideration of the degree and circumstances depending on specific cases.

(2) In light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the Defendant, even after having become aware of the existence of a spouse, committed an unlawful act with C, thereby infringing upon, or impeding the maintenance of, marital life falling under the essence of marriage between C and C, infringing upon the Plaintiff’s right as the spouse of the Plaintiff, and thereby infringing on the Plaintiff’s right as the Plaintiff’s spouse, which is obvious in light of the empirical rule that the Plaintiff suffered considerable mental suffering, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to compensate for mental suffering suffered by the Plaintiff.

Furthermore, regarding the amount of consolation money that the defendant should compensate, the period of marriage and family relationship between the plaintiff and C, and the contents, duration and degree of fraudulent act.