The defendant paid KRW 25,00,000 to the plaintiff and 5% per annum from September 24, 2020 to January 20, 2021.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 23, 2015, the Plaintiff and C have one child in 2015 under the sleep as a legally married couple who completed the marriage report.

B. The Defendant was the head of the department, serving as the female employees of the entertainment shop around 2018.

C was aware of the fact that C was a spouse, and C was aware of the fact that it was a spouse, and entered into an inhumanial relationship, such as having a sexual intercourse, and on August 5, 2020, Seoul Family Court 2020 Ddan 129455 against C, for recognition and child support for his/her child born.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

(a) A third party who has established a liability for damages shall not interfere with a married couple’s communal living falling under the nature of marriage, such as intervention in a marital life of another person, causing failure of the marital life of the married couple;

In principle, a third party’s act of infringing on a couple’s communal life falling under the essence of marriage or interfering with the maintenance thereof and infringing on a spouse’s right as the spouse by committing an unlawful act with either spouse, constitutes a tort (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Da1899, May 13, 2005). As recognized earlier, the Defendant committed an act of infringing on a couple’s communal life with the Plaintiff and C and interfering with their maintenance by maintaining an inappropriate relationship with C around May 13, 2009, while being aware that C was a spouse, while maintaining a sexual intercourse with C around 2019. As such, it is obvious that the Plaintiff suffered emotional distress due to the above Defendant’s tort, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to go against it in money and in accordance with the empirical rule, and the Defendant is obliged to proceed with C with C by stating that C is a separate and expected divorce with the Plaintiff (the Defendant is a separate and expected divorce)

However, such circumstance alone led to the failure of the defendant to the extent that it is impossible to recover the marital relationship between C and the plaintiff before it associates with C.

The recognition is insufficient, and there is no reflective evidence.B.