Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance.

A. The Plaintiff is the sectional owner of subparagraph D in the fifth floor of the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C building (hereinafter “instant building”); and the Defendant is the sectional owner of subparagraph E and F in the fourth floor of the instant building.

B. The Plaintiff installed a human turf and its water network in the outdoor facilities of the fifth floor of the instant building and used them as a resting place and a golf driving range. On January 2013, some of the instant outdoor facilities owned by the Defendant were water leakage phenomenon.

C. On January 29, 2013, the Defendant prepared and issued to the Plaintiff a written confirmation of the following contents (hereinafter “instant confirmation”).

(However, if the name of the originator is "G" due to the lack of rooftop waterproof on the fifth floor, the expenses incurred by the removal of the facilities of the fifth floor are responsible for the golf course (the plaintiff). If the water is safe from the facilities of the fifth floor due to the lack of rooftop waterproof on the fifth floor, the expenses incurred by the removal of the facilities of the fifth floor would be responsible for the fourth floor H building owner (the defendant).

On April 15, 2013, the Plaintiff removed (hereinafter “the removal of this case”) pipes installed at the lower end of the instant water turd and the water turd.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Entry of Evidence A Nos. 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Even after the removal of this case’s cause of the Plaintiff’s claim, water leakage continues to exist in a sectioned building owned by the Defendant on the fourth floor of the instant building. Thus, it was revealed that the Plaintiff’s water leakage phenomenon was not occurred due to artificial turfs and pipes installed in outdoor facilities on the fifth floor of the instant building, and therefore, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff KRW 3,000,000 (= interest rate of KRW 2,500,000 at KRW 50,000) and delay damages therefrom according to the instant confirmation.

3. In order for the Defendant to pay the removal cost of the instant case to the Plaintiff according to the instant confirmation document, the removal of the instant case even after the date of the determination.