2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. Defendant Korea Rail Network Authority (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant Rail Network Authority”) is an executor of the Nowon-gu Construction Work (hereinafter referred to as the “instant Construction Work”), and Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant B”) is the contractor of the instant Construction Work, and the Plaintiff is a resident who has operated a dog raising 298 dogs from Da Kimpo-si around the instant construction site.

B. The construction period of the instant construction was from June 26, 2014 to December 30, 2017, and the construction project generating noise and vibration was undertaken from December 17, 2014 to August 28, 2015, and the construction section was KRW 10,000,00 in Gyeonggi-do.

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 6-1 to 26, fact-finding with respect to the Environment Diagnosis Institute of this Court, the result of the appraisal by the appraiser G of this Court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that noise and vibration occurred from the construction of the instant case caused damage to the pet dog 298 dubs raised by the Plaintiff due to extreme stress, and thus, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to compensate for the said damage.

B. The Plaintiff’s assertion by the Defendants was unlawful since the Plaintiff agreed to bring an action against the damage caused by noise and vibration generated by the instant construction works.

3. Determination on the legitimacy of a lawsuit

A. According to the purport of the Plaintiff’s 1 evidence and the entire pleadings, around May 2016, the following agreements were made between the Plaintiff and Defendant B based on the results of the damage assessment service of the Environment Diagnosis Institute requested by the Defendants, and Defendant B paid compensation of KRW 62,057,565 to the Plaintiff within the payment period pursuant to the following agreements. According to the above facts, according to the above facts, the Plaintiff did not file a lawsuit against the Plaintiff with respect to the damage of peties caused by noise and vibration generated by the instant construction.