A. Connectioning the Plaintiff 1 Co., Ltd. with each point of the attached Form 10, 8, 16, 15, 14, and 13, which passes through the articles of incorporation (number 1 omitted), and the airspace above the land (number 2 omitted);

B. Connectioning the Plaintiff 2 Co., Ltd. with each point of the No. 13, 25, 24, and 19 of the annexed Form No. 2, which passes through the airspace above the land on the surface of the Articles of incorporation (number 3 omitted);

C. Connectioning the Plaintiff 3 with each point of the attached Form 2, which passes through the articles of incorporation (number 4 omitted), the building (number 5 omitted), the building (number 5 omitted), and the airspace above the land (number 19, 39, 40, 45, 46, 49, 50, 51, 52, and 31;

D. Connectioning the Plaintiff 4 with each point of the attached Form 2, 31, 63, 62, and 57, which passes through the airspace above the land (number 6 omitted) on the surface of the articles of incorporation of the Busan Gun;

Each power transmission line (154,000 V Astrest power line) shall be removed.

2. The defendant shall pay 1,00,000 won to plaintiffs 3 and 4 and 5% interest per annum from June 27, 2007 to August 28, 2008 and 20% interest per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

3. The plaintiffs' remaining claims are dismissed.

4. Of the costs of lawsuit, 1/5 are assessed against the Plaintiffs, and the remainder are assessed against the Defendant.

5. Paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article may be provisionally executed.

The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the following facts: Gap evidence 1-1-6, Gap evidence 2-1 through 4, Gap evidence 3-1-3-4, Gap evidence 5-2 through 6, Gap evidence 6-1, Eul evidence 3-1, Eul evidence 3-2, Eul evidence 5, Eul evidence 6-1, Eul evidence 6-2, Eul evidence 6-1, 2, Eul evidence 8, the on-site inspection result of this court, the result of the survey and appraisal of the appraiser Kim Byung-kick fever, and the whole purport of the arguments in fact-finding with the head of Busan District Office of Korea National Housing Corporation.

A. The Plaintiffs, as indicated below, are the owners of the land (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant land”) and the building on which one unit of repair (in the case of the Busan-gun’s Articles of Incorporation, hereinafter referred to as “use repair”) is located in the area of land (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant land”) and the building on which one unit of land is located in the area of each of the instant land. In the case of Plaintiff 3, the Plaintiffs are operating a factory in each

A building on land included in the main sentence, for the purpose of repair (number 1 omitted), (number 7 omitted), factory repair (number 3 omitted), factory repair (number 4 omitted), household repair (number 4 omitted), Plaintiff 2 Co., Ltd. (number 3 omitted), household repair (number 4 omitted), building for the purpose of repair (number 8 omitted), factory building, dormitory, housing, household building, office repair (number 6 omitted), factory building, temporary repair (number 6 omitted), and household building for Plaintiff 4.

B. From April 1973, the land area above each of the instant land is passing through 17 to 28 meters high from the roof of the factory building in each of the instant land where one of the 2nds among the 154,000 V voltages owned and managed by the Defendant from around April 1973 (hereinafter “the instant transmission line”) is installed at a height of 17 to 28 meters from among the 2nds above each of the instant land. Of the part where the transmission line 2nds, the area overlaps with each of the instant land (hereinafter “outboard”), other than the building’s ground among the parts where the transmission line 2nds, the area of each part of the instant land overlaps (hereinafter “public land”) is as follows.

Plaintiff 1, Plaintiff 1, the vacant land area of which is located in the main body, for the purpose of repair (number 1 omitted), 5,14 square meters and 415 square meters, for the purpose of repair (number 7 omitted), Plaintiff 2, the Plaintiff 2, the 1,697 square meters and 74 square meters, for the purpose of repair (number 3 omitted), Plaintiff 3, the 1,697 square meters and 1,653 square meters and 161 square meters, for the purpose of repair (number 8 omitted), Plaintiff 4 (number 6 omitted), the 985 square meters and 127 square meters, for the purpose of repair (number 6 omitted) 1,653 square meters and 161 square meters, for the purpose of

C. The transmission line of this case goes through the airspace above each of the land in this case by connecting 36 transmission towers installed over the land adjacent to the land for irrigation (number 2 omitted) and 35 transmission towers installed far from each of the land of this case. The non-party Korea National Housing Corporation was to create a new city on the surface of the articles of incorporation of Busan Gun, and on January 19, 2004, requested the defendant to relay the transmission line of the new city in relation to the above new city development project. Accordingly, the defendant installed the relay transmission line construction from March 17, 2004 to December 22, 2006, and installed the transmission line 35 removal of the above transmission tower at another place during the above construction, and installed it again on the new site (hereinafter referred to as the "the construction of the new transmission line of this case").

D. At the time of the construction of the transmission tower of this case, when the transmission tower was relocated and newly established in accordance with the Defendant’s plan, the transmission line of this case goes through the airspace in each of the land owned by the Plaintiffs, and thus, the Defendant demanded suspension of construction. However, the Defendant did not plan to transfer the transmission line because the construction of the transmission tower of this case did not go through the airspace in each of the land of this case. However, the Defendant responded to the Defendant to promote compensation in accordance with the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes as to the lower portion of the site of the transmission line which goes through the airspace in the land of the Plaintiffs.

E. Meanwhile, the Plaintiffs acquired ownership in 192 and 1993, which was since 1973, all of the instant power transmission lines installed for the first time.

2. Chief;

A. The plaintiffs

The Defendant is obliged to remove the transmission line on the ground of the Plaintiffs in response to the Plaintiffs’ claim for the exclusion of interference with the ownership of each of the land, and to pay damages for delay to the Plaintiffs as compensation for tort, inasmuch as the transmission line in this case goes through the airspace above the Plaintiffs’ land due to forcibly implementing the construction of the transmission tower in this case without disregarding the Plaintiffs’ claim, and even if the transmission line in this case goes through the airspace above each of the land in this case, the Defendant is obligated to remove the transmission line on the ground of the Plaintiffs’ land in this case.

(b) Sponsor;

① In addition, due to the construction of the transmission steel tower, the transmission line does not pass through the airspace in the land owned by the Plaintiffs. ② The Plaintiffs acquired each of the instant land with knowledge that all of the instant transmission lines pass through the airspace in each of the instant land; the transmission line of this case is a very important power supply line linking Busanwest and Dong department, which could cause enormous social and economic losses; most of the notice due to the transmission line of this case is an open space, and there is no obstacle to the Plaintiffs’ land use; Defendant Company has installed and managed the instant transmission line lawfully around November 6, 191; and Defendant Company was approved to use each of the instant land by Nonparty 1 Cooperatives. In light of the fact that Nonparty 1, who was the owner of each of the instant lands around November 6, 191, the instant claim constitutes abuse of rights.

3. Determination

A. Determination on the claim for the removal of transmission lines

(1) Determination as to the cause of claim

(A) First, as to whether the electric transmission line of this case passed through the airspace above each land owned by the plaintiffs due to the construction of the electric transmission steel tower of this case, it is insufficient to recognize this only by the statements in the Health Team, Gap Nos. 5-3 and 5, and the testimony of non-party 2 of the witness, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

(B) However, the ownership of land affects the upper part of the land within the scope of legitimate interest. As seen in the above facts, as long as part of the transmission lines of this case passes through each of the lands of this case owned by the plaintiffs, the defendant is obligated to remove the transmission lines of this case in response to the plaintiffs' claims for removal of interference based on the plaintiffs' land ownership, unless there are special circumstances.

(2) Judgment on the defendant's assertion

However, if the exercise of the right can be seen as an abuse of the right, the subjective purpose of the exercise of the right is to inflict pain on the other party and to inflict losses on the other party, and there is no interest on the other party, and objectively, the exercise of the right should be viewed as a violation of social order, and unless it does not fall under such cases, even if the damage is significantly high to the other party than the profit that the exercise of the right has gained by the exercise of the right, such circumstance alone does not constitute abuse of the right (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Da44285 delivered on November 23, 2006).

① As seen in the above facts, the plaintiffs were operating factories in each of the lands of this case, or resided in the housing (number 4 omitted) while operating the above factories, and thus, there is a legitimate interest in exercising each of the lands of this case. Thus, the plaintiffs' request for removal of transmission lines of this case is merely causing pain and damage to the defendant, and it is hard to say that there is no benefit to the plaintiffs. ② At the time of the construction of the transmission tower of this case, the defendant received the plaintiffs' claim, and stated that there was a compensation plan for the land under each of the lands of this case, and even now, it is possible to secure the right to use the airspace of this case through legitimate procedures under the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, but no effort was made to secure a legitimate right to use the above lands of this case, and the plaintiffs did not have acquired the ownership of each of the lands of this case with the knowledge of the situation where the transmission lines of this case was installed, and thus, it is difficult to conclude that the plaintiffs did not acquire the ownership of each of the lands of this case as public land of this case.

B. Determination on the claim of consolation money

(1) Determination as to the claims of Plaintiffs 3 and 4

As seen earlier, Plaintiff 3 and Plaintiff 4 operate a factory on the land owned by themselves, and in particular, in the case of Plaintiff 3, if they reside there, it is obvious in light of the empirical rule that the high voltage power transmission line of 154,000 V, which the Defendant established and managed, caused inconvenience in the operation or residence of the factory due to the passage of the above land and the ground building, and that such mental pain was inflicted, so the Defendant is obliged to do so in money to the above Plaintiffs.

However, the above plaintiffs acquired the land of this case after the installation of the transmission line and did not have any objection for several years after the acquisition, at least 17 meters from the ground, the transmission line is installed at a height of at least 17 meters from the ground, the power transmission line of this case is at the location where each of the plaintiffs' land was invaded, the proportion of the vacant area in the advance, and all other circumstances revealed in the pleadings of this case, the amount shall be set at KRW 1,00,000, respectively. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay damages for delay at a rate of 5% per annum from June 27, 2007 to August 28, 2008, which is the day after the copy of the complaint of this case was delivered to the defendant, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment.

(2) Determination on the claim of Plaintiff 1 and Plaintiff 2

Since a corporation itself has no ability to feel mental suffering, if it is not aware of other non-property damage, it cannot claim consolation money for mental suffering, and on the other hand, it cannot be viewed as a corporation's damage. Thus, as long as the above plaintiffs are corporations, the claim for this part cannot be accepted.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims of this case are justified within the above scope of recognition, and each remaining claims are without merit, and they are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

[Attachment] Survey and Appraisal Map 1, 2: (Omission)

Judges Go Young-tae (Presiding Judge)