beta
Text
The part against the plaintiff falling under the amount ordered to be paid under the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.
The defendant.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On September 18, 1995, the Plaintiff and C (the name before the opening of a name: D) have been legally married couple who completed the marriage report on September 18, 1995, two children, and have been engaged in a marital life.
B. On April 11, 2018, the Defendant committed an unlawful act, including being aware of the fact that C is a female, and being accommodated in the hotel E in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E (hereinafter “instant hotel”).
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 5, video, purport of whole pleading
2. Determination
A. In principle, a third party who causes damage to a spouse by committing an unlawful act with the spouse, thereby infringing on or interfering with the common life of the spouse falling under the essence of marriage and infringing on the spouse’s right as the spouse, thereby causing mental pain to the spouse, constitutes a tort (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Meu2441, May 29, 2015). According to the above acknowledged facts, it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant committed an unlawful act with knowledge that C is a spouse on April 11, 2018, thereby infringing on the spouse’s common life of the Plaintiff and C or interfering with its maintenance, and thereby causing mental pain to the Plaintiff by infringing on the Plaintiff’s right as the spouse.
Therefore, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for mental damage suffered by the plaintiff due to the above tort.
B. The defendant's argument 1) The defendant's argument 1) The defendant did not commit any unlawful act by avoiding disturbance with G and leaving C into the hotel of this case while C, which is located in April 11, 2018, with G, and there was no unlawful act. The marital community relationship between the plaintiff and C, which is between the plaintiff and C, was in the irrecoverable state around February 28, 2018. Thus, even if the defendant committed a wrongful act with C and C on April 11, 2018, it does not constitute a tort against the plaintiff even if the defendant committed a tort against the plaintiff.