beta
Text
The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 20,000,000 as well as 5% per annum from July 9, 2020 to December 17, 2020, and the next day.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The plaintiff and C are legally married couple who completed the marriage report on August 29, 2007, and have two married couple under the chain.
B. On January 2019, the Defendant maintained a sexual relationship with C and continued to have a sexual relationship with C, even though he/she became aware of his/her spouse, through a hosting app around February 2019, and around August 2019, the Defendant continued to have a sexual relationship with C by May 2020, even after the Plaintiff became aware of the aforementioned facts.
C. The Plaintiff, who is under the therapy, was treated with a psychiatrist due to depression, etc.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 18 (including branch numbers in case of additional number), Eul evidence 2 and the purport of whole pleadings
2. The judgment of the plaintiff's claim is examined, and the third party shall not interfere with the marital common life equivalent to the essence of marriage by intervening in the marital common life of another person, causing the failure of the marital common life. The third party's act of infringing on or interfering with the marital common life equivalent to the essence of marriage by committing an unlawful act with one of the married couple, causing mental distress to the spouse by infringing on his/her spouse's right as the spouse, in principle, constitutes tort.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2011Meu2997, Nov. 20, 2014). According to the above facts, the Defendant’s act of maintaining a matrimonial relationship with C even though he/she was aware that he/she had a spouse C, while maintaining a matrimonial relationship with C, constitutes a tort against the Plaintiff as an unlawful act infringing on the Plaintiff’s right as his/her spouse, which constitutes a tort against the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff was suffering from considerable mental suffering. Thus, the Defendant is obligated to avoid mental damage suffered by the Plaintiff in money.
Furthermore, regarding the amount of consolation money that the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff, the plaintiff and the plaintiff.