1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff first became aware of the Defendant around 2003, and from around 2011, the Plaintiff was living together with the Defendant since around December 2013, and was living together with the Defendant.

B. Around December 2013, the Defendant: (a) prepared and delivered to the Plaintiff a letter to the effect that “any woman other than the Plaintiff shall not meet, but shall pay 50 million won as consolation money when she wishes to take the hedging (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant notes” (Evidence A 1).

A A

C. Meanwhile, the Defendant completed a marriage report on July 18, 2006, and started marriage with Nonparty C. However, according to the divorce judgment requested by Nonparty C (Seoul Family Court Decision 2014ddan5010 decided June 26, 2014), the Defendant divorced with Nonparty C around August 2014.

Around February 2016, the Plaintiff was diagnosed as “heat cerebral Bribery,” and was hospitalized for one month, and the Defendant began to be able to file a lawsuit between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff. Around that time, around October 2016, the Plaintiff’s house and the Plaintiff’s living together with the Plaintiff was terminated.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Evidence No. 1 and video No. 1, the result of the Plaintiff’s personal examination, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion asserts that, inasmuch as a de facto marital relationship with the Defendant was broken down due to the Defendant’s unlawful act and the Defendant’s separate notice around October 2016, the Defendant is liable to pay KRW 50,000,000 and damages for delay pursuant to each of the instant agreements.

B. We examine the judgment, as seen earlier, the Defendant prepared and delivered each of the instant statements to the effect that “when she wishes to take a feassive female other than the Plaintiff, she shall pay 50 million won as consolation money when she takes a feassive female,” around December 2013. However, the statement of evidence No. 3 and the result of the Plaintiff’s personal examination alone, the Defendant committed an unlawful act, or the Defendant unilaterally hedging to the Plaintiff.