The defendant shall pay 15,00,000 won to the plaintiff and 5% per annum from October 2, 2019 to November 13, 2020 and the next day.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff is the legal spouse of C.

B. The Defendant: (a) knew of the fact that C is a spouse, and provided meals with C from May 2, 2018 to December 2 of the same year; (b) provided meals with C, or deemed motion pictures.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The act that a third party who is liable for damages causes mental distress to the spouse by infringing on or interfering with the common life of the married couple falling under the essence of marriage and infringing on the rights of the spouse as the spouse by committing an unlawful act with the spouse of the married couple constitutes a tort in principle.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997 Decided November 20, 2014). According to the foregoing facts, the Defendant, even though he/she is a spouse, committed an unlawful act with knowledge that he/she is a spouse, thereby infringing on the Plaintiff’s communal living or interfering with the maintenance of the Plaintiff’s marital life and infringing on the Plaintiff’s right as his/her spouse. As such, the Defendant is obliged to compensate for mental damages

In regard to this, the defendant argued to the effect that the defendant's action was not a violation or interference with the maintenance of the marital community, since the common life of the plaintiff and C was already distressed by the defendant at the time of the delivery of C. However, the evidence submitted by the defendant alone is insufficient to recognize that the marital community of the plaintiff and C was in a state where the failure had already occurred at the time of the delivery of C. There is no other evidence to

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. Considering all the circumstances such as the content and circumstances of the instant wrongful act within the scope of liability for damages, and the impact of the instant wrongful act on the Plaintiff’s common life, it is reasonable to determine the amount of consolation money to be paid to the Plaintiff by the Defendant as KRW 15,00,000

Therefore, the defendant shall pay consolation money to the plaintiff 15,000,000 won and this.