채무부존재확인
1. The construction of a new building and the operation of a factory in Pyeongtaek-si B farm site of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its ground factory.
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a person who runs an industrial waste recycling business, etc. in the area of 9384 square meters in Pyeongtaek-si B farm site. The Defendant from around 1981 to around 1981, is a person who has operated “D” (hereinafter “instant stock farm”) such as raising milch, etc. in Pyeongtaek-si C adjacent to the instant factory.
B. From August 9, 2010 to October 23, 2010, the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant construction”). From April 11, 2011, the Plaintiff continuously engages in crushing and crushing of wastes, such as waste synthetic resin, waste synthetic fibres, waste rubber, waste rubber, waste timber, waste timber, etc., in the instant factory from April 11, 201 to October 23, 201, the annual treatment capacity of the instant factory reaches approximately 48,00 tons.
C. In the instant plant, the cause of the instant plant from February 14, 2012 to July 23, 2015, and the occurrence of six times of fire due to the unexpected and natural combustion, and the large fire fighting cars, etc. entered the instant plant within the stock farm in the process of extinguishment.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 6 (including each number), video, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The Plaintiff’s liability for damages until October 20, 2016 relating to the instant construction project and the operation of the instant factory against the Defendant does not exceed KRW 58,79,210, which is the amount of damages until December 31, 2013, recognized by the financial decision of the Central Environmental Dispute Mediation Committee, as of June 5, 2014, and the damages for delay under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.
B. The construction of this case executed by the Plaintiff and the operation of the factory of this case generated noise and vibration, and due to soundproof walls installed by the Plaintiff adjacent to the farm of this case, the natural ventilation of the farm of this case was impeded, and the fire that occurred at the factory of this case had a great stress on livestock.