2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

A. On June 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract to lease the E fishing village fraternity located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and the said fishing village fraternity (hereinafter referred to as “instant fishing ground”) owned by the said fishing village fraternity, and entered into a contract to lease the fishery license [F (type of fishery: fishing business, fishing ground area, fishing ground area, captured and gathered, and species of cultivated products: 5)], number G (type of fishery: fishing business: 26th: fishing business, fishing ground area, captured and gathered, and species of cultivated products: seaweeds: seaweeds) and its fishing ground (hereinafter referred to as “instant fishing ground”). On February 20, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a move-in report with the H located in the area of the E fishing village fraternity, Jeonnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun.

B. From November 2014, Defendant Jungung-gun had undertaken a J development project in the first place near the fishing ground of this case to the Jeonnam-gun, Goung-gun, and the Defendant B Co., Ltd. was awarded a contract with Defendant Jung-gun on May 27, 2015 for the construction of the foundation for the said development project (hereinafter “instant construction”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 8, 19, 22 (including branch numbers in case of provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 7 or video, part of the appraisal statement submitted by the appraiser C of the first instance court, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. From 2013 to 2014, the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) purchased 1.1 million US dollars from K from 2013 to 380 million US dollars; and (b) sold to the fishing ground of the instant case by spraying the 380 million US dollars; and (c) all of the entire uniforms cultivated by the Plaintiff due to the outflow of earth and sand generated from the instant construction to the sea was discarded until the second half of 2015; (d) the Defendants jointly and severally compensate the Plaintiff for the amount of damages incurred by the Plaintiff due to joint tort (i.e., estimated sales amount of KRW 4,126,263,964 - Labor expense of KRW 1,650,505,586 - Additional Fishery expense of KRW 294,221,938).

3. Determination

A. The above evidence, Gap evidence, Eul evidence Nos. 4, 26, Eul evidence Nos. 8 and 9, and the witness of the first instance court K and this court testimony or part of the witness.