1. The Defendant’s KRW 30,000,000 as well as 5% per annum from April 12, 2014 to December 30, 2014 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 16, 1985, the Plaintiff and two children were married couple who completed the marriage report with C on December 16, 1985.

B. From around 2006, the Defendant and C began internal relations by establishing two-three sexual intercourses per week with each other with the knowledge of their spouse.

C. From around B, 2010, in order to search for the evidence of non-fashiveness of C, the Plaintiff observed the witness of C and the Defendant. On September 7, 2009, in order to search for the evidence of non-fashiveness of C, the Plaintiff discovered a sexual intercourse declaration prepared on September 7, 2009 between C and the Defendant (C is the husband of the Defendant, and the Defendant will act as the husband of the Defendant, and the Defendant will act in good faith with C as the denial of C) and the Defendant’s pictures, etc.

The Defendant and C, even though they were aware of the fact that the Plaintiff had the wheels, was maintained by the fact that the relationship was not established until December 2012, and the relationship was liquidated.

E. The Plaintiff did not divorce with C or bring a divorce lawsuit against C for the future of their children, but is currently being separated from C and present.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 4, Gap evidence 5-1 to 4, Gap evidence 5-1 and video, Eul's testimony and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. 1) In a case where a person who has a spouse is in common with a person who has been in common with the other spouse, and as a result, a third party who has been in common with the other spouse, thereby causing the failure of the marriage due to the other spouse’s separate treatment or divorce, constitutes a tort against the other spouse, and accordingly, the other party is obligated to have the other spouse suffered mental suffering from the other spouse (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Da1899, May 13, 2005). According to the above facts acknowledged, according to the above facts, the defendant was aware that he is the spouse of C, and continues to have a inhuman relationship with C for a considerable period (7 years). Such unlawful acts committed by the defendant, which practically led to the marriage between the plaintiff and C.