beta
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2019.11.12 2018가단212514

손해배상(기)

Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff (a) is the owner of a reinforced concrete structure, flat 292 square meters in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant land”) and a multi-family house and a residential building with the fourth floor above the second floor above the ground constructed on the said land (hereinafter “instant building”).

나. 이 사건 건물은 2002. 1. 19. 사용승인이 되어 건물 중 1층은 원고 B가 임차하여 식당으로, 2층은 원고 C이 임차하여 마사지�으로, 3층 H호는 원고 D이 임차하여 주거용도(홈스테이)로, 4층은 원고 A가 주거용도로 사용하고 있고, 3층 I호와 지하층은 공실이다.

C. The Defendants constructed a church building of the size of 150 square meters underground and 5th above ground (hereinafter “the building owned by the Defendants”) from February 1, 2017 as co-owners of the Seoul Mapo-gu J Religious Site (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”) located adjacent to the instant land and the road of a large volume of 4 meters wide, and completed registration of the preservation of ownership as co-ownership shares on August 10, 2018.

The instant land and the Defendants’ land are located in the third-class general residential area, and are abutting on the roads of the first-class (35 m to 40 m) as they are.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 8 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. According to the construction of a new building owned by the Defendant, Plaintiff A, the owner of the instant building, infringes on the right to sunshine and view, thereby incurring property damage, such as decline in the market price of the instant land and building and the cost of repairing drain pipes from the aspect thereof, and the rest of the Plaintiffs, the lessee of each of the respective parts of the instant building, who are the lessee of the instant building, suffered damages, such as signboards, equipment, etc.

B. If a land owner, etc. is deemed to have value as an objective living benefit that he/she had enjoyed from the previous legal doctrine, he/she may be legally protected.