Must say that she has skin as thick as the wall of china for having the audacity of acting offended or angry. She was the one that deceived her lover's wife with his complicity. She was the one that hurt her. He was the one that told her the truth. She absolutely had the right to know, and he should have told her as soon as he learned of this. The sheer *gall* of believing she had the right to continue deceiving the poor woman. Priorities. Hiding the truth to not hurt her is the moral equivalent of the police not prosecuting Bernie Madoff because they didn't want their clients to feel duped. But they were duped. And in that case pain in a good, positive thing, that tells them the truth: that something effed up has happened. By this "lying for her own good" line, we should be happy being human batteries living a lie in the Matrix. Utter idiocy and sheep like thinking. If instead the "feelings" that should have been spared are the ones of the adulterers, they deserve as much considerations as they have shown their spouses and children. That is, none at all.

Not sure how to interpret the fact that apparently the gift is made into this big deal, when she forgot their marriage anniversary and was ready to cheat on him the day after their anniversary.

In terms of being negletful and taking each other for granted, obviously they are both doing it, it should be pointed out that they *both* forgot about the anniversary, and that he was the one that proposed having some time together as a family, and she was the one that refused him, explicitly choosing to meet her lover in a hotel to have sex.

Not sure with what face she is giving him a gift now.

Not sure how I am meant to interpret that she remembered his birthday after forgetting their wedding anniversary (and planning to sleep with her lover the day after their anniversary, despite her husband proposing they spend time together to reconnect). Notably, when he asked whether she needed something she smiled and said everything was ok rather than talking about her problems, so I am not sure how he was meant to know that she was not feeling well in the first place. Telepathy?

Also, apparently some of the sheeple in the comments have decided unilaterally that they *both* forgetting about their anniversary, say, means that only he takes his wife for granted (strange claim, since she was the one planning to sleep with her lover the day after, while he was the one that tried to organize some time to spend together or to get her to open up after getting the first inkling that she was not as well as she seemed... deceiving someone for one year, refusing to spend time with them preferring to sleep with her lover, seems like a bit more intentional and "taking things for granted", particularly since she has the splendid example of her lover, a phylanderer that cheats on his wife and the mother of her children with a married woman with kids... much more deserving of her, or them of each other, to be sure).

Not sure what the drama is trying to convey with the gift scene. She remembered his birthday? But she forgot their anniversary, so not sure that this is an indication of attentiveness. She planned to sleep with her lover the day after their anniversary, even when her husband wanted them to take time off and rekindle their relationship. Not sure I am seeing any effort to keep him, here, and between the two of them it's a bit insulting that he is the one making an effort to keep their marriage from falling apart (in an "if you broke it, fix it" kind of way... not that anything she could ever do would ever fix this).

I mean, the gall of her questioning his motivation and anger. The extra twist is that the guy actually did something good: stopping her lover's wife from being deceived by them (indefinitely, if they had anything to do with it) any longer.

I would have understood the resentment/anger if he and her lover's wife had slept together. Though that revenge sex would still have been their prerogative, and if it made them feel better, all the more power to them. It's not as if the ones actually deceiving/hurting/humiliating their partners have any right to complain about their treatment. Turnabout is fair play, and they are not *even* as they did not start it. Actually a twist taken by, for example, American Gods.

The additional kick to her betrayal the day after their anniversary is the fact that the guy, knowing the truth, actually tried to get her to open up and spend some quality time together to reconnect. She chose to betray him instead, lying to his face. Consciously. How can she then pretend to be invested in the relationship? By the way, they *both* forgot their anniversary, so not sure why only he is getting the label "negletful" attached to him. He thought she was another person. On one hand, well adjusted and happy (and her smiling without telling him anything was wrong certainly didn't help, as he is not a telepath), on the other hand, faithful and worthy of his trust (which she abused, clearly demonstrating she was not, in fact, worthy).

It should be said than not ever point of view deserves being aired or is rational or objective. The point of view that they are free to do as they please and it's nobody's else's business, as well as the point of view she can unilaterally decide to divulge his shame, or when and if to tell the other woman they hurt that they were leading her by the nose, is not worthy of consideration (but it is worthy of contempt).

I mean, I get that *everything* about this strikes a nerve with him, but I must admit that her giving her lover a present is the least of his worries... she deceived him for half a year, and in its sociopathic way this fact should be much more present in his conscience, which instead turns to pathetic moves such as beating someone up... which is essentially losing the argument, in this case. It's not as if it can erase him sleeping with his wife. I would advise "love, not war", specifically between the two cheated parties. Could be even as an eff you to get back at their exes (or the cheater that should soon be exes.

Good point that I really wish would be carried through all the drama (but this won't be the case, as he would convince himself that he brought this upon himself, a-la "look how short the skirt she was wearing", and like a battered housewife he will come back with his tail between his legs).

But yes, the perp is not the victim.

I am not sure what the "hurting too" part means... he is hurting, the other woman is hurting. and those that hurt them are the ones that were deceiving them. Blaming him for this is the same as blaming Neo for freeing the humans living in a delusion and being used like batteries. A nice fantasy, but this is not reality. Bernie Madoff smiling while he rips you off still means you are being ripped off, the pain associated with this discovery is a good thing. It means you are not being treated like children, and not too bright ones at that.

Not sure why forgiveness would even enter the discussion. Did they do anything to deserve it, besides admitting the obvious after being caught? Is there anything they can do to deserve it? I think not.

Anyone processes pain as he wants, but it's funny that he is so focused on the guy when the one that lied to him to his face is his wife. She was not forced into anything or deceived in any way. He did not take advantage of her. She made a conscious choice, when he presented her the alternative to reconnect, to lie to his face and go to sleep with her lover. Of course, the lover is scum that did the same to *his* wife, and also filth that would wreck another person's family (they had six month and they wouldn't have stopped had they not been caught, so any excuse that they "didn't mean" go out of the window, not that they would be any more valid had this been a one night stand rather than conscious, premeditated deception).

Irritating that she would be the one trying to push for separation, when in any rational universe after his initial mention of divorce he should have been out of the door and never looked back. Instead he is still here, dealing with her toxic mix of unfounded self righteousness and self pithy (and her other toxit bs in general).

I mean, I disagree in that I think that this in most certainly *not* the time to victim blame, gaslight and focus on *his* flaws. They *both* forgot their anniversary, but she was the one that planned to spend the day after it in the arms of another man, while he was the one that tried to get her to spend time together and reconnect. They were *both* neglectful, and when he asked her instead of telling him about her troubles she smiled... and he was supposed to be a telepath?

This is all besides the point. He is neither a wife beating drunk nor some scum like her lover that would cheat on his wife and the mother of his children (with someone else's wife with kids of her own, I might add). I would say "I rest my case". There is no proportionality, and in terms of intentions, one is an unconscious slight, the other a conscious, premeditated, long term deception. If someone steals some bread, they might have done something bad, but from here to say that they deserve to have their hands cut off there is a world of difference.

And they were equally neglectful, and the one trying to savage the situation and try to reconnect and invest in the relationship, trying to get her to open up when he learned something was wrong. She was the one deceiving him about her own problems (he was perfectly kind when he asked her about her issues and she smiled instead of admitting she had problems, or when he offered to spend time together and she chose to be with her lover instead).

But most of all... they have her lover, the philanderer. With a wife so loyal that wouldn't cheat on him or leave even after what she did to her (which was much worse than not understanding her completely -not sure this can be lied entirely on his feet either, given how she lied and didn't communicate, and his lack of telepathic powers-). By contrast, neither of the cheated partners would have ever betrayed their spouses (and boy if they gave them reason to... I actually think that some revenge sex would have been more than warranted).

I mean, there is low life scum, and then there is low life scum that doesn't care about deceiving someone for months and months until caught, and then want to act as if she gives a damn, as if their feeling are more important than their victim learning the truth, and as if they should be entitled to have their revolting actions buried under the sand because they don't want to deal with their consequences.

Episode could have spent more time on the point that if she wanted to cheat, she could have chosen someone unattached (who would have been an equally beyond the pale, but marginally better filth, compared to the philanderer that betrayed his own family she chose to go with), so as to ruin the life on "just" her own family, and not someone else's.

Stating the obvious, but she lied to him again. She told him that she wouldn't meet her lover again, but she did meet him -no misunderstanding here-. It was not romantic, but he had the right to know he was the client on her project, and she did not divulge that information.

Regarding her being taken off the project, though I agree with the fact that it is inappropriate for them to continue to meet, I will highlight that it is her that is taken off it, rather than him that chooses to step aside. As would be expected of the self centered philanderer that would deceive his wife and the mother of his children with a married woman with kids of her own.

Some comments on the general hypocrisy here. The guy cannot really have it both ways. He deceived his wife for six months with a woman he claims to be in love with. He might well be calm and not hate his lover's husband, that is not the point, nor is it whether they intended to hurt them or not, as he said in the other chapter. It does not matter if that was the goal in and of itself or a side effect. The main point is that it's a side effect they were willing to accept, in other words that they were perfectly willing to hurt/humiliate/deceive their lover's partner, not caring about their lover's children, despite them not having done anything to them (and to do the same with their own partners and children). Hurting someone you don't know for your own selfish whim denotes a rather sociopathic lack of empathy, or a hierarchy of priorities where satisfying their own selfish whims trumps walking all over and hurting other people. The indifference (or at least the not caring enough not to do it) is maybe worse than if it was intentional. it's the swatting of a fly, it's probably what vegans think about people who eat meat in a context where it's not really necessary.

The most disgusting thing is that they were not willing to tell the guy's wife. That's truly, truly reprehensible. The fact that if he did not leave him without any other choice, he would have never come clean to his wife and give him the basic human courtesy of being able to make her own decisions knowing all the facts. That was just disgusting.

"“These women aren’t cheating because of their husbands. They just like any man besides their husband. Let’s not turn the innocent husbands into sinners.” So much for objectivity."

The claim regarding the motivation is untrue (and I could imagine situation like the wife beating drunk or spouses cheated upon having revenge sex with someone else -hopefully before divorcing their cheating spouses-, where the cheated upon spouse deserved it). But being unhappy does not imply cheating. That's a choice, and a choice that some people, including the protagonist and the wife of his wife's lover, would never make, despite the horrific betrayal they suffered (unfortunately, I was looking forward to them paying back their cheating spouses with the same coin).

A key aspect is who they are cheating with. In the protagonist's case, his wife was meeting a philandering husband with his own family.

I found the suggestion of "understanding why she did it" insulting. Okay, that's something that could be addressed. But frankly, the motive is besides the point. Reminds me of a journal article I had read that used those exact words: the loneliness, the thing missing from the marriage, etc. might all have been valid complaints to address in the appropriate manner, or grounds for divorce. They are not reasons to cheat. For that matter, we see characters here that have been put through much worse: the protagonist, her lover's wife. They don't cheat (they don't even abandon their partners). They should. The wife beating drunk, or a philanderer like her lover, or herself for that matter, do deserve to be cheated on (was hoping for some revenge sex between the cheated spouses). Him being slightly inattentive might be true in and of itself, but we cannot seriously consider it a "reason to cheat" any more than we can seriously consider "stealing a loaf of bread" a reason for "having your hand cut off". There is no proportion. This cannot be an excuse/rationalization. They might be true. But unhappyness does not equate cheating. Again, her lover's wife and her husband have more than enough reason to be unhappy, and they won't cheat on their spouses (though shey should, as they would deserve it). There is simply no proportionality between an unintentional slight and a premeditated (her "not inteding to" is hogwash and evasion) half a year long deception.

There is another element to this, namely that her lover is married and has a family. She does not know them, and they *surely* did not to anything to deserve the hurt/humiliation/deception, so there is no possible way they could be factored into her "reason" (on the other hand, being able to do this to them signals a rather sociopathic lack of empathy). Again, surely they *did not* contribute to her decision to hurt/humiliate/deceive them, given that she did not even know them in the first place and they did nothing to her. She simply didn't care about hurting her, at least not enough to...

Disagree with the claim of it not being a "black and white" situation. There are such situations, such as a drama like Hymn of Death, where people were literally forced into marriages not of their own choosing. There are the case of the wife beating drunk or the philanderer that is paid back with their own coin. For anything else, being unhappy does not imply cheating (the protagonist and the wife of his wife's lover both *do not* cheat, despite having been deceived). And an unintentional slight stands in the same proportion, and makes as much sense when used as a reason for, a months long deception, as a stolen bread and having your hand cut off. Nothing black and white about that, there is only a possible assessment, namely "the punishment does not fit the crime", to use a metaphor.

I am more than inclined with being indulgent with regards to the protagonist's behavior and motivations. They broke him emotionally, now he is angry and lashing out (I found the fight a ridiculous show of impotence, and find pathetic that he thinks he had his revenge: this is not the case). Frankly, he had a much better reason to reveal the truth to the lover's wife, namely that, as he remarked, she was in his same position, and they don't have any right to choose for her what she needs to know and to lead her along, letting her live a lie, as if she was a little kid that did not know about Santa. She needs to live in reality and to consciously choose, with all the information, whether she wants to continue living with her husband, who by his own admission is in love with another woman, his lover (and, had he been decent, would have broke things off with his wife *before* starting a relationship with the woman he was in love with -that's the bare minimum, I won't mention waiting for her not to be married, because that's a level of decency and respect that it's not even in the same galaxy as the philandered husband-). He was in the same position, and if someone knew, he would have very much preferred learning about the truth sooner rather than later. The point in life is not to avoid suffering at the cost of living a lie, but to try to achieve an happyness based on reality, which is the only one that counts and the only true happyness, to be frank. Otherwise we are human batteries in the matrix, cattle being fed only to be slaughtered.

I found the adulterer's self entitled demand to keep things under wraps, involving the husband in a plan to continue to deceive the philandering husband's wife completely revolting and self serving. This is *not* something that does not involve her and that needs to be kept from her, this is the same level of infantilization that any villain treats the public with -they don't know better, they have to be deceived for their own good (maybe even spied upon? Wink Wink)-.

I found the idea of hiding the truth from the philandering husband's wife completely revolting. She is not a child that didn't learn about Santa. She is a grown adult that is being led by the nose. I found particularly irritating the adulterous wife's self righteous behavior, and her questioning his motivations -yes, he is angry, and he has every right to be-, when her and her lover's motivations were completely self serving. Her lover's wife *deserves*, nay, *needs* to know the truth. Channeling the book "Lying" in spirit, a painful truth is better than a pleasant lie. A North Korean might very well have been brainwashed into thinking that they live a thousand times better than their fellow humans in the South, but that does not make it true, and the truth will set them free, to use another paraphrase.

To clarify, in the above when I talk about the two adulterers sacrificing their lover's family for their own selfish whim, I meant to say "superficial whim". I don't put the protagonist's desire for revenge in the same category. He feels rightful anger and the need to lash out, and it's perfectly understandable for him to be emotionally unbalanced. It's completely rational and justified for him to want his wife's lover to face the consequences of his actions. He hates himself and, by projection, his wife, or more specifically he hates their blindness and stupidity. He wants to not be the only one suffering (misery loves company).

While I wish he would have ceased this bs and actually realized that he has a positive case to make here (he would have liked to know the truth, even if it was painful, instead of being deceived, and she is in the same position, plus it's appalling that they are asking him to compromise), his reasons for doing what he is doing are perfectly explained and understandable, certainly not disproportionate with respect to what was done to him. Furthermore, he is no more responsible for the wife's hurt than the family that ratted him out and the police are responsible for Bernie Maddoff's victim's hurt. This is a good hurt, because it means she is not living a lie. And this is not a superficial whim, him hurting people he does not hate. He does hate his wife's lover, for good reason, and he does hate the cheated wife, because she is in his same position and he hates his own ignorance of the deception. But yes, I should have made what I meant clearer in the pieces above.

I find that there is a fundamental difference between their casual disregard of their partner's family's safety, and the protagonist's hatred here, and in some regards it would have been better had they actually hated them or had any other selfish reason for doing what they did. As it is, the ruination of their own and their partner's family is not even the goal, but simple road kill. That's what meant to point to when I was talking about "selfish whim", which should have really been "superficial whim". Lack of a reason besides just not caring. Hatred would have been better.

"Hyun-woo scoffs that a man who loves his family so much would cheat."

Not sure how he can conclude he loves them from the fact that he has photos of them. Whether he does or not, quite evidently, factually speaking, not enough to avoid hurting them for his own superficial whims, without any specific reason, as simple road kill. So, not enough, and frankly I would say not at all. It cannot be placed on the same level as the protagonist or the wife of the lover of the protagonist's wife, neither of whom cheated on their partners, even in response to the cheating.

I would strongly push back on the "he hurt her" narrative. That is the same as saying that the police and Bernie Maddoff's family "hurt" Bernie's victims by revealing his deception. No, reality hurt them, and the two adulterers hurt her. The protagonist simply hated himself and, by projection, her. He didn't want to be the only one to know, to be alone. These are perfectly understandable motivations, they have a clear reason, they are not superficial whims, they have deep roots in his trauma. I find the hatred more honest and preferable than the concern trolling self servingly masquerading a with to escape the consequences of their own actions

Let's be clear about this: if the wife wanted to "keep it in the family", she should realize that her lover's family is part of this too. I put her hurting her husband by throwing her sleeping with her lover and her being the one missing him and reaching out for him first after their first encounter in the same spiteful vein that animated him here. Not a superficial whim, in his case, in hers? I don't know. Not sure where she gets the shamelessness of being short with him, after what he witnessed in the morning and had to learn, and after lying to him for half a year, and after spurning his attempt to reconnect on the day after their anniversary, to spend time with her lover instead.

I cannot shake the feeling that if she was in her lover's wife's place she would want to know the truth. Same goes for her lover. Her husband certainly wanted to know. So it's pretty clear that hiding this information from them is mere self serving bs. Before asking to "keep it in the family", so to speak, she should have realized that her lover's wife is part of the family as well.

I feel that the apology would have more weight behind it if she did not treat him curtly or try to preach to him from the pulpit. As he correctly remarked, she is not exactly in a position where she can give morality lessons to anyone, and hurting someone because you hate them is a hundred times preferrable than completely disregarding their suffering for no real reason at all -to satisfy a superficial whim-. Good or bad, he did have a reason. In my opinion, he had tons of better motives to do what he did. He should not hate himself nor his wife, by projection. Trusting their partners unconditionally was a mistake, but the ones at fault are the adulterous copule, for having exploited that trust.

I mean, wanting to keep the truth from her lover's wife and letting him get away with this behavior scott free? How about no? Like the factual outcome, could have done without some of the self hartred and projected self hatred.

"When she says she heard, he assumes she’s still meeting with the man."

Not like he thinks, but she did tell him that she would avoid contact with him, lying by omission by not telling him that he was the client of the project she was working on, and lying full stop by meeting him the very next day. And more importantly, not telling him anything of this key information.

"asks if they can’t fix the problems between them, but Hyun-woo snaps that she’s the one who cheated, so how can she act like she did nothing wrong? He rages that it isn’t fair that his whole world was turned upside down while both Soo-yeon and Sun-woo can walk around like nothing happened."

Exactly my point. She has no right, *no right*, to make this request. It would be massively unfair for them to have deceived them and destroyed their lives, and for him to have to swallow everything up, button everything down and cover it up just to make their lives easier. Actions have consequences, and it is only fair that they deal with the ones their caused. Telling is wife is a part of this, and a necessary part of this. It is simply unfair to the ones they hurt that they can continue to deceive the ones that did not have the luck of being able to catch on to their ruse.

I find the notion that she would feel entitled to ask him to essentially cover for her and her lover and "resolve things among themselves" as insulting as it can be. Basically, they destroyed his life, and they expect him to help them to go back to normal as if they had done nothing wrong, and in doing so becoming an accomplice in the deception of her lover's wife. Despite not liking the characterization this chapter, I was more than satisfied with the fact that she was informed, and would have liked more emphasis of the basic fact of the fundamental unfairness of their demands: they don't have any right to be isolated from the consequences of their own actions, and in particular they don't have any right to ask the very person whose life they wrecked to essentially cover for them and act as their shield.

I'll say this, for the wife it was a painful but necessary wake up call, a harsh but necessary truth. She now can make an informed decision, knowing full well what kind of snake she is sharing a bed with. For the husband, it's simply the rightful, logical consequences of his actions, nothing more than what he deserves: there is no extraneous punishment heaped on top of it, he simply has to deal with the consequences of his own actions and choices and everyone else does, and in that respect it is literally and quite factually exactly what he deserves. Any suffering on his part is a result of his own actions and as such fully deserved.

Incidentally, statistically speaking, as strange as it might seem, coming clean actually improves the changes of a couple staying together (not that in my opinion it should make the betrayal any less unacceptable, but we can say that at least you give the other person the right to choose with full context -the correct choice being divorce, maybe preceded with some revenge sex with the other cheated upon party-). They might think they were getting away, but it's not true that lies do not affect a relationship, and coming clean is better than her discovering it herself. Not that he came clean, or ever would, had his hand not been forced. So not sure if technically he allowed him to enter in the "more likely to patch things up" category, my understanding is that it is not the case (the protagonist briefly talked with the wife, so she knows or should suspect that it was not a voluntary decision on her husband's part).

I find it pretty galling that she would ask him to sacrifice and cover for them by bottling this all up and not speak to anyone. It's not his job to protect them from the well deserved consequences of their own actions. On the contrary, it would be perfectly reasonable and justified for him to do everything in his power to make sure they pay such consequences to the full extent possible (as, thankfully, he does in this chapter).

The idea of them simply going back to their own lives with their unsuspecting partner (not partners because he discovered the truth) is one of the most unfair concepts imaginable. Their partners have the right to know the entire truth and make a decision on what they want to do with full context. This was not stated clearly (in favor of other equally valid points about them not having the right to continue with their lives as if nothing happened, when they wrecked the lives of the people they deceived), but it really should have been, because it is really the most fundamental, basic concept here.

No mention of atonement or making it up to them (well, before that all their partners should be made aware of their activities, something that they had no intention to come clean to them about). Not that there is anything they could ever do to make things right, but notice that they don't even make an attempt to (like he correctly identified, they act as if this is a normal slight like having forgotten a birthday, with complete calm and nonchalance). Their (eventual, if it exists) inner guilt counts for nothing in that respect, as my guilt at having eaten the cheeseburger counts for noting towards my weightloss journey. Same thing for them not "intending" to hurt them or her not "intending" to deceive him.

I did not "intend" to eat the fries, and "intended" to go to the gym, but did the former and not the latter. Likewise, she (they) consciously, in a premeditated fashion, organized the months long deception with phone calls and bookmarking an hotel, looking him in the face and telling him that she can't spend the day after their anniversary with him, rekindling their relationship, while she intended to sleep with her lover instead. Being reluctant to disclose the duration of the affair and whether they slept together or not, as well as lying by omission about him being her project's client, something he had every right to know and that was utterly relevant in assessing her second promise of not coming into contact with him again, which was promptly broken, as she met him the very next day.

I mean, I don't get where she gets the idea that she has the right to dictate the terms of how the fallout of her affair being discovered should go down, namely that he should not discuss it with anyone and not reveal it to the *other* poor person they were duping. She had no right to make that decision and it is galling she would even ask.

Regrading the trust issue (gift, etc.), it's not about being open minded or willing to listen or not (by the way, he just discovered her affair, so it's normal he would be hurting an in fighting mode, not sure where he is supposed to suddenly recover from the emotional wreckage and turn into the cold Star Trek's Data). It's about him having reasonable questions, and her not answering or being evasive (he asks a question, she answers with something completely unrelated). For that matter, she fails to mention that her lover is her client in her work project, which might be something relevant he would like to hear, essentially lying by omission -if she is not on another planet, she should know it's something he would like to know-, since she is not exactly being forthcoming and he has to press her to keep on track and spill the beans, it's hard to place the blame for the lack of trust on him -this is without even considering the basic fact that he was previously convinced she was a perfect woman deserving of his unconditional trust and she exploited that fact to deceive him for the last six months-.

I have some issues with the characterization here (I mean, he did not one-up the guy or score a victory, beating him up unfortunately for him does not settle the score for the months long deception... more generally, the guy did not *steal* anything, as he learned in the previous episode it was his wife that missed him so much that reached out to him first after their first encounter: she has agency, and should be held to account and answer for her own actions). That said, I am really glad that he did what he said he would do last chapter, namely not let them get away scott free with their deception. They don't deserve to continue living their lives as if nothing happened while their victims try to hold on and survive in the (emotional, mental) wreckage their left behind. If somebody deserves to be in pain, it is the perp, not the victim, here -no reason to sacrifice himself for the sake of protecting her lover, who had no qualms about sleeping with his wife knowing she was married with kids, nor about betraying his own wife and the mother of his children-. More importantly, his wife *had* to be made aware of the situation. I completely reject this *hurting someone else for revenge hogwash* from the commenter at the beginning of the chapter (with the protagonist himself in his emotionally unbalanced state lashing out... understandable, I can empathize, but he should not hate himself and his ignorance, and the cheated wife in her ignorance by reflection). Even if he was cold as an iceberg, this was the absolutely *correct* decision to do. He wanted to know the truth, and the cheated wife, being in his exact position, wants to know the truth as well, and she has exactly the same right to.

Actually, reading better the comments, I was mistaken about him hating his wife's lover's wife. He is mad at her as he is mad at himself, but there is really no self-hatred here or hatred for her. He does not care about their feelings, and frankly speaking, the fact that she suffers is secondary to the fact that she needs to know the truth. His wife's and her lover's feelings, obviously and correctly, are besides the point here and outside his concern. That's personally alright and understandable. But this was not an attempt to hurt her for its own sake. As for the adulterers, they are facing the consequences of their own actions, which is perfectly just.

[ep5] I tried really hard, but I really cannot simpathize/empathize with the adulterous wife. I get the point about her being stressed. I don't really understand how this is connected to the affair (one would guess that a lover would take away time, not clear her schedule, and somehow she can't find two hours for relaxation, but she "magically" finds the hours to be with him... plus he tells her to think about what she wants, but she does not change anything about her life at all, all of her committments stay the same). What I don't get is the long term deception part. She had six months to break it off and even come clean, but she was intending to lie to him indefinitely, while continuing the affair (she was the one reaching out to her lover after their first encounter).

So she put herself in situations like the following:. Her husband asked her to spend time together to reconnect the day after their anniversary (this in my mind should meet the relaxation/mee time part, and I don't get why it wouldn't be a turning point if this was her motivation and she loved her husband/wanted to stay in the marriage). She lied to his face, deliberately making it seem as if she had a work meeting, and went to have sex with her lover in a motel. Afterwards she planned to pick up her son.

We see her show guilt after he knows of the affair, and even not being able to look her husband in the face and live with her shame, which is why she tried to divorce him multiple times. And they broke the affair off so easily. I don't get why they didn't after their first time, or whether they didn't feel guilty about lying to their partners when they didn't know. That's a problem with the drama, I think, that we never see the conflict/guilt *during* the affair: while they were having it, they were able to lie effortlessly, afterwards she cannot look him in the face and live with him.

I tried to tell myself that she put on a mask and she basically never let him see her true face, lying to him all the time, or that she compartimentalized... but I really can't understand how her (or her lover) were emotionally not even tempted to come clean and at the same time didn't even consider breaking off the affair (she is the one telling that she would have continue the affair and the lies indefinitely). Same thing for her lover lying to his wife even after ending the affair. In all this, I really don't get at an emotional level how she could look them in the face and not be conflicted or feel the need to come clean. After she had cheated once due to the motives give, why did it not stop there and she reached out to her lover again? How could she not feel the need to break it off and even come clean? In her place, I would imagine guilt eating me alive and I wouldn't be able to last a day without spilling the beans, when looking at my lover and child's face, let alone plan to both lie to them indefinitely AND continue the affair.

And... the next chapter the lover's wife will thankfully shut up all the commenters and thank the cheated husband for telling her the truth. As was her right to know. While her own husband would have treated her as an object and disposed of her like property, continuing to lie to her for the rest of her life, because he felt he was entitled to have her by his side and didn't want to offer her even the possibility of leaving him for someone better. In short, because it was convenient for him. Same reason instead of walking away himself he will later fire his lover from the project even discussing it beforehand and badmouth her to his wife.

I mean, what am I to make of the big deal about the gift she bought him? She was a habitual liar and serial cheater, he had asked her how she was and whether she wanted to spend time together to reconnect the day after their anniversary, which she (like him) had forgotten -unlike apparently his birthday, but what is it that the show is hinting at? That since she got one of the two she cares? When she would have deceived him indefinitely?-, and she lied to his face that she was fine and had a work meeting, only to go sleep with her lover and go pick up her kid afterwards.

Seems to me that *not* being a habitual liar and serial cheater would be a better present to him than a wallet. Her not spurning his offer to reconnect, lie to him and go sleep with her lover, then pick up her kid as if she did nothing, would have been a birthday gift. But since she did, what use does he have for a effing wallet? Seems like mockery: she was willing to hurt/humiliate/deceive him indefinitely, without caring enough to not cheat, not reach out to her lover after the first time, not be a habitual liar and serial cheater, but she gives him a birthday gift? After forgetting their anniversary (like he did), and going to seep with her lover the day after? Insulting to the viewer's intelligence at how shameless this all is.

For that matter, in terms of purchases she got the sexy red lingerie for her lover (the one in chapter one he had never seen before), so it's not a first for her to give 'gifts' to him. Also quite shameless that she would not mention that her 'coworker' was really a client on a project she led, and that she saw him everyday. She had just promised her husband she wouldn't be contacting him, fully knowing that and hiding this from him, and now she met him one to one, because he chose to get rid of her even discussing it beforehand.