1. The Defendant’s KRW 13,00,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from January 4, 2019 to July 12, 2019, and the following.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff and C are legally married couple who completed the marriage report on April 20, 2005.

The plaintiff and C have one child under one name.

B. From June 1, 2018, C performed the accounting work of officetels operated by the Defendant, and the Defendant, despite being aware that C has a spouse, has entered into an inhumanity relationship with C by having sexual intercourse with C between November of the same year.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1 (including a tentative number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant committed an unlawful act with C and C, which are the plaintiff's spouse, and infringed the plaintiff's common life with C and C. Accordingly, the plaintiff suffered mental suffering, and the defendant is liable to pay consolation money of KRW 30,000,100 and delay damages to the plaintiff as compensation for damages caused by such unlawful act.

B. The judgment of a third party shall not interfere with a married couple’s community life falling under the nature of the marriage, such as intervening in a couple’s community life of another person and causing the failure of the married couple’s community life.

In principle, a third party's act of infringing on a couple's communal life falling under the essence of marriage or interfering with the maintenance thereof and infringing on the right as the spouse's right to it and causing mental pain to the spouse shall constitute a tort.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Da1899 Decided May 13, 2005, etc.). According to the above basic facts, upon being aware that C is a spouse, the Defendant, even after being employed in an officetel operated by the Defendant, committed an act of infringing upon and obstructing the maintenance of the marital life of the Plaintiff and C by maintaining an inappropriate relationship with C from November 2018, while maintaining a sexual intercourse with C. The Defendant suffered emotional distress due to the Defendant’s tort, and thus, the Defendant suffered emotional distress to the Plaintiff.