1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 20 million.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. Of the costs of lawsuit.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 2014, the Plaintiff became aware of the Defendant through smartphone display, and began with the Defendant from that time.

B. At the time, the Defendant was married with his wife and child, but was found to have concealed such facts. The Plaintiff believed that the Defendant was unmarried and thought that he was married, and led to the Defendant’s genuine marriage, and the Defendant had sexual intercourse several times in the process.

After leaving the workplace, there were many cases where the defendant started to go to the plaintiff's house, and around August 4, 2014, the defendant was engaged in regular personnel affairs of the plaintiff's family.

C. On August 17, 2014, the Plaintiff became aware of the fact that the Defendant was pro-Nam.

On the other hand, the plaintiff was pregnant as a sex relationship with the defendant around that time, but the defendant knew that he was married to his father and was subject to the pregnancy surgery according to the defendant's end-of-age. The plaintiff and the defendant were hedging around that time.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy Facts, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2, witness C's testimony, purport of whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff is an unmarried woman under 33 years of age, and the defendant believed to be unmarried and, at least, did not deny the possibility of marriage, entered into a marital relationship with the defendant, with the defendant, without being required to enter into a marriage or at least excluding the possibility of marriage.

In this process, the defendant has concealed the fact that he is his father and has actively induced the plaintiff.

The above act by the defendant constitutes a tort that interferes with the free decision-making of the plaintiff's sexual self-determination and infringes on the right to sexual self-determination.

Furthermore, since it is apparent in light of the empirical rule that the plaintiff is unmarried female suffering from the above illegal act, the defendant is obligated to take the defendant's suffering from mental suffering in money.

The plaintiff was pregnant as the period of the plaintiff and the defendant's teaching system, the defendant's deception behavior, the frequency of sexual intercourse, and the sex relationship with the defendant, but the defendant's religious life.