1. The Defendant’s KRW 15,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from November 9, 2017 to June 21, 2018 to the Plaintiff.

1. According to the overall purport of the statements and arguments stated in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 15, according to the facts of recognition, the plaintiff (the plaintiff 1974 birth) is a wife C (the 1978 birth) and a legally married couple who completed a marriage report on March 2009, and has married in 2012 (the 2012 birth), and also the defendant, who is the father and son with the wife, has maintained an inappropriate relation with C with the knowledge that C was a married woman from May 2017.

(Attachment Form 11 provides D dialogue between the Defendant and the Defendant. The contents that suggest sexual intercourse or that C wants to kill the Defendant in the future at the time when the Defendant started his house. Moreover, even the D message between the Defendant and C as to No. 4, there is a content that the Defendant’s wife expressed the sexual intercourse between the Defendant and C, i.e., “a photograph which was unfolded by affixing his seal at his own time. (Defendant).” Meanwhile, the Defendant’s wife was aware of the teaching agenda between the Defendant and C and the Defendant, and was against the Plaintiff, the husband of C as to this issue).

A. A. The defendant's duty to pay consolation money shall not interfere with a married couple's communal life falling under the nature of the marriage, such as interfering with a third party's communal life of another person, causing the failure of the married couple'

In principle, a third party's act of infringing on or interfering with the maintenance of a marital life falling under the essence of marriage by committing an unlawful act with the spouse's right as the spouse (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Meu2441, May 29, 2015). On the other hand, "illegal act" under Article 840 subparagraph 1 of the Civil Act should be understood as a wider concept, including any unlawful act that is deemed not faithful to the husband's duty of mutual assistance, even if it did not reach the common sense, and even if it is confirmed that there is a text of correspondence between the Defendant and C, and even if it comes to the common sense between the Defendant and C, it shall be understood as a more broad concept, including any unlawful act that is deemed not faithful to the husband's duty of mutual assistance.