The defendant's KRW 20,000,000 and its interest to the plaintiff are 5% per annum from August 19, 2020 to November 17, 2020.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff and C are legally married couple who completed the marriage report on October 14, 2002, and have four minor children among them.

B. Around June 2020, the Defendant first met with C at the Syssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss, from around that time until July 16, 2020 to the Plaintiff

C. After the Defendant was discovered to the Plaintiff, the Defendant entered the Plaintiff’s house with C and stayed on August 3, 2020.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 4 (including branch numbers, if any) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. 1) 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 a spouse’s right as a spouse by committing an unlawful act with the spouse, thereby infringing on the spouse’s right, thereby constituting tort (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 2011Meu2997, Nov. 20, 201). 2) According to the above acknowledged facts, the Defendant is liable to compensate for emotional distress inflicted upon the Plaintiff, in principle, by committing an unlawful act with C even though he/she is aware that he/she is a spouse, thereby infringing on the Plaintiff’s communal life with C or interfering with the maintenance thereof and infringing on the Plaintiff’s right as the spouse.

3 The defendant asserts to the effect that there is no causal relationship between the defendant's improper act and the damage suffered by the plaintiff, since the marital relationship between the plaintiff and C was in the state of failure at the time of the defendant's expulsion with C

However, the evidence presented in this case alone is insufficient to acknowledge the above facts, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge them, and the defendant's above assertion is not acceptable.

B. The scope of damages and the marriage period and family relationship between the Plaintiff and C, and the Defendant and C.