1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 5, 2014, the Plaintiff completed the marriage report with C on September 5, 2014, and the Plaintiff and C have five years of age.

B. On June 18, 2018, the Defendant, who was in military service, received leave of absence on the part of June 18, 2018, went to her friendship and drinking house, and started teaching system by becoming aware of C that he/she was a guest at the same drinking house.

C. Around July 2018, the Defendant was discharged from the military forces.

C. On June 24, 2018, the Plaintiff became aware of the fact that C and the Defendant had the right, and requested C to adjust the relationship with the Defendant.

C, on August 2018, without disclosing that he is a woman, notified the Defendant of his intention to speak in the future. Since November 2018, C continued to teach the Defendant again from November 2018.

E. Around June 22, 2019, the Plaintiff became aware of the fact that C is traveling again with the Defendant, and C withdraws on June 29, 2019 and avoided contact with the Plaintiff.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 11 (including each number if there are several numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. In light of the fact that around February 27, 2019, C indicated the Defendant that he was a woman, and that C owned a large SUV vehicle at the age of 20 seconds and posted a white-day photograph of his child in C’s D account, the Defendant is recognized as having been aware of C’s being a woman.

Nevertheless, the defendant continued to teach C with C, which constitutes a tort against the plaintiff, who is the spouse of C, and the defendant has a duty to compensate for mental damage suffered by the plaintiff.

B. The Defendant’s assertion C did not disclose to the Defendant the fact that he was a woman, and C’s D account was in a non-activable state, and the Defendant was unaware of the fact that he was the spouse of C, so the Plaintiff’s claim is unreasonable.

3. As evidence consistent with the Plaintiff’s assertion, evidence Nos. 6, 7, and 12 are indicated, but the evidence No. 1 is indicated.