1. Basic facts

A. On February 201, the Plaintiff completed a railroad bridge up to 2,150 meters in length (hereinafter “instant bridge”) by implementing a bridge construction project around 2012 and completing the road board construction project around 2013, the Plaintiff completed the railroad bridge (hereinafter “instant bridge”).

B. Before the instant bridge was installed, the Defendant: (a) leased the land from the owners of each of the above land and cultivated sprink and sprink in the 3,652 square meters and D 1,887 square meters in the 3,652 square meters and D 1,87 square meters in the 11st, E, and the 4,950 square meters in the 2nd, E, and the 11st, E, and the 2nd, respectively; and (b) cultivated the sprink and sprink in the 2013rd since the completion of the instant bridge.

C. Some sections of the instant bridge are adjoining to the south side of the land where the instant vinyl was located. The total length of the said section is 200 meters and the height is 20 meters, and the remaining end of the instant bridge is located at a distance close to nearly adjacent to the instant bridge, and the vinyl 2 is located at a place less than about 40 meters away from the instant bridge.

The Defendant filed an application with the Central Environmental Dispute Conciliation Committee for environmental dispute conciliation to the effect that the Plaintiff and Hyundai Construction Co., Ltd., the contractor of the instant construction, seeking damages, such as the amount of damage caused by the reduction in the production of crops, and the cost of relocating greenhouses, were incurred due to the construction of the instant bridge.

E. On August 21, 2014, the Central Environmental Dispute Mediation Committee is likely to cause sunshine that exceeds the tolerance limit under the social norms to greenhouse houses once due to the construction of the instant bridge.