1. The Defendant’s KRW 15,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from October 17, 2019 to January 23, 2020 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 10, 1992, the Plaintiff and C have her children under the sleep with the legal couple who completed the marriage report.

B. The Defendant, at the alumni conference around 2015 and C, has been developed as a male and female relation from November of the same year, and even though C is aware that he/she has a spouse, he/she is a cleaning agent. The Defendant is a cleaning agent at our house.

B. A cleaning agent here.

It is the same that there is a sense of view. B.

Then, our two Koreas are well living together with others at the same time, even if they are little.

the Corporation shall live the Earnico.

B. The defendant is only the wind of the match.

Haba Haba Haba Haba Haba Haba Haba and play.

It has entered into an inappropriate relationship, such as exchanging communication with one another.

C. C remains in the office of the defendant as shown below, and it is three times in the nights.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Gap evidence Nos. 5 through 8 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

(a) A third party who has established a liability for damages shall not interfere with a married couple’s community life falling under the nature of marriage, such as interfering with a couple’s community life by causing a failure of the married couple’s community;

In principle, a third party's act of infringing on or interfering with a marital life falling under the essence of marriage by committing an unlawful act with either side of the married couple and causing mental pain to the spouse by infringing on the rights of the spouse as the spouse.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997 Decided November 20, 2014). As seen earlier, the Defendant, even though being aware that C was a spouse, while maintaining an inappropriate relationship with C from November 2015, committed an act of infringing upon and obstructing the maintenance of the marital life of the Plaintiff and C, while maintaining the marital relationship with C from the point of view of being aware that C was a spouse, and as such, it is obvious that the Plaintiff suffered emotional distress due to the Defendant’s tort is in light of the empirical rule.