The defendant's KRW 10,00,000 for the plaintiff and 5% per annum from April 25, 2020 to October 15, 2020 for the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a legally married couple who completed the marriage report with C on August 12, 2005, and has two children under his/her chain.

B. From June 2018 to April 2019, the Defendant knowingly committed a fraudulent act with C while being aware that C is a spouse.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries or images of Gap evidence 1 to 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. 1) In principle, a third party’s act of infringing on or impeding the maintenance of a married couple’s community life falling under the essence of marriage and infringing on the spouse’s right as the spouse by committing an unlawful act with the spouse of the married couple, thereby causing emotional distress to the spouse constitutes tort (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 2011Meu2997, Nov. 20, 2014). 2) In light of the above acknowledged facts, the Defendant committed an unlawful act with C, knowing that the spouse is a spouse, thereby infringing on the Plaintiff’s community life or interfering with the maintenance thereof, and thereby causing emotional distress to the Plaintiff, and thus, is liable to compensate for the Plaintiff’s emotional distress.

B. In full view of all the circumstances indicated in the records and arguments in the instant case, including the scope of damages and the marriage period and family relationship between the Plaintiff and C, the contents, period and degree of the unlawful act committed by the Defendant and C, the impact of the Defendant’s improper act on the marital life between the Plaintiff and C, and the circumstance before and after the instant lawsuit, it is reasonable to determine the amount of consolation money to be paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiff as KRW

(Plaintiff is seeking consolation money of KRW 31,00,000,000, but it is not accepted in excess of the above recognized amount).

Therefore, the defendant is about the existence and scope of the defendant's obligation from April 25, 2020, which was the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case sought by the plaintiff as a result of the illegal act against the plaintiff.