2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

A. The Plaintiffs are co-owners of the Yansan-gu T apartment (the 3rd, the 33rd above ground, and the 33rd above ground, and the hereinafter “Plaintiff’s apartment”).

(Specific Dong/Dong number is the same as the address of each plaintiff among the party indications.

The Defendant is a building owner who newly constructed two units of apartment units and neighborhood living facilities (hereinafter “Defendant apartment units of this case”) with the size of 4,660.1 square meter, total floor area of 45,784.7542 square meter, 2 units of apartment units and neighborhood living facilities (hereinafter “Defendant apartment units of this case”) on the ground of the previous city, Busan-gu, U.S. and one parcel adjacent to the Plaintiff’s apartment site.

C. The Plaintiff’s apartment and the Defendant’s apartment are located within the central commercial area.

After the new construction of the Defendant apartment, the change of sunshine hours for each apartment owned by the Plaintiffs is as shown in the attached Form.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 5 (including each number in the case of additional number), appraiser V's appraisal result, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The defendant is liable for compensating the plaintiffs since the construction of the new apartment in this case by the plaintiffs' assertion that each apartment owned by the plaintiffs caused mental damages due to the infringement of right to enjoy sunshine exceeding the limit of admission.

3. The consolation money due to the infringement of the right to sunshine against the claims of plaintiffs K, Q and R is recognized for mental damage caused by the deterioration of the residential environment, such as the reduction of sunshine, not property damage, and thus it is difficult to recognize such consolation money to the owner who does not reside in the damaged building. Since plaintiff K, Q and R are those who do not reside in the apartment of the plaintiff of this case, the plaintiffs' claim against the defendant of this plaintiffs against the defendant is groundless.

4. Determination as to the plaintiffs' claims except for plaintiffs K, Q and R

A. As a result of the construction of a new building of the relevant legal doctrine, a resident on the adjoining land was at a disadvantage blocking direct luminous lines.