1. The Defendant’s KRW 15,00,000 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from October 2, 2015 to October 11, 2016.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 19, 2005, the Plaintiff is a legal spouse who has completed a marriage report with Nonparty C (hereinafter “Nonindicted Party”) on May 19, 2005, and has two women’s children under the chain.

B. On March 21, 2015, the non-party D, who was doubtful of the non-party’s external appearance, was witnessed that the non-party D, who was the new wall, was parked in the Defendant’s vehicle.

C. According to the text of the Kakao Kakao that the Defendant and the Nonparty sent and received, the Defendant and the Nonparty divided the expressions, such as “I am am s s am s s am s s am s s am s s ams s ams s ams s ams s ams s ams ams s ams ams s ams ams s ams ams s ams ams ams s ams ams s ams ams ams ams ams ams ams ams s ams ams ams ams ams s

Around April 7, 2015, the Nonparty drafted a written Divorce performance agreement with the Plaintiff, stating that “A principal was present at the latest night on March 20, 2015, and agreed to the divorce between the Defendant and the her mother.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, and 8, witness D's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The act of infringing on or interfering with the common life of the married couple falling under the essence of marriage and of infringing on the rights of the spouse as the spouse and causing mental suffering to the spouse, in principle, constitutes tort.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Meu2997, Nov. 20, 2014). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, according to the health care unit and the above-mentioned facts, the Defendant’s act deviating from the extent of being socially acceptable while maintaining a relationship with the Nonparty.