1. The Defendant’s KRW 20,000,000 as well as the annual rate of KRW 5% from June 8, 2016 to April 25, 2017 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and C are legally married couple who reported marriage on February 23, 2011, and have two women between them.

B. From around 2015, the Defendant, despite being aware of the fact that a workplace partner C is a person who is married and is a spouse, maintained a close relationship between C and the workplace, left the Plaintiff’s personal meeting, and had a sexual relationship at the Defendant’s home.

C. On May 9, 2016, the Plaintiff listened to the conversation between the Defendant and C, such as “self-, armsbes, and patriotism,” through a mobile phone, which has been mistakenly divided into C, and came to know of the external appearance of C and C, and C accepted it.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 6, and 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The act that a third party who is liable for damages causes mental pain to the spouse by committing an unlawful act with the spouse of the married couple, thereby infringing on the common life of the married couple falling under the essence of the marriage or interfering with the maintenance thereof and infringing on the spouse's right as the spouse, constitutes tort in principle.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2011Meu2997, Nov. 20, 2014). According to the aforementioned facts, the Defendant’s act of committing an unlawful act, including a sexual intercourse with C, the Plaintiff’s spouse, constitutes an unlawful act detrimental to the integrity of marriage or the peace of home against the Plaintiff. This constitutes a tort against the Plaintiff.

Since it is clear in light of the empirical rule that the plaintiff suffered from mental suffering, the defendant is obligated to give a monetary reward to the plaintiff.

B. Furthermore, the scope of damages and the amount of consolation money to be paid by the defendant are shown in the arguments in the instant case, such as health team, the period of marriage between the plaintiff and C, the contents and duration of the misconduct between the defendant and C, the circumstances leading up to the establishment of improper relations with C, and the defendant's attitude after the discovery of the misconduct.