beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 10,000,000 and its related amount are 5% per annum from July 28, 2018 to March 26, 2019 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On June 21, 2006, the Plaintiff and C have one child under the chain of law as a husband and wife who completed the marriage report.
B. From January 2016 to April 201, the Defendant sent to C such words as “voluntary or great,” “I wish to listen to my voice,” “I want to talk to do so,” “I want to talk to do so,” “I wish to do so,” “I wish to do so,” “I wish to do so,” “I wish to do so,” and “I wish to do so,” and “I wish to do so, I sent to the Defendant the same words as “I am special, I am special,” “I am special,” “I am special,” “I am special,” “I am special,” “I am special,” “I am special,” and “I am special, I am special,” “I am special,” “I am special,” and “I am special, I am special, and maintain the inappropriate relationship.”
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry and video of Gap evidence 1 through 6 (including branch numbers for those with a satisfy number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. A. 1) A third party’s liability for damages does not interfere with a married couple’s community life falling under the essence of marriage by interfering with a married couple’s community life by causing a failure of the married couple’s community life. A third party’s act of infringing on or maintaining a married couple’s community life falling under the essence of marriage by committing an unlawful act with the married couple, and infringing on the spouse’s right as the spouse, thereby causing emotional distress to the spouse (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2011Meu2997, Nov. 20, 2014). In this case, the term “unlawful act” in a broad concept that includes adultery, but does not reach the adultery, includes any unlawful act that does not comply with the husband’s duty of good faith, and whether it constitutes an unlawful act shall be assessed in consideration of the degree and circumstances depending on specific cases (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 8Meu7, May 24, 198; 8Meu68, Nov. 10, 1992).