손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. Basic facts
A. D reclaimed land (hereinafter “instant reclaimed land”) is located on the left side of the border line, on the map of the location of the orchard and the landfill site owned by the Plaintiff.
) On the right side of the border line, there is a location and a parcel of ten square meters, not less than B orchard 1,289 square meters and 10 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “instant orchard”) at the residence of the Plaintiff and owned by the Plaintiff.
(2) The instant orchard is located. (2) On the other hand, since most of the instant orchard have a tendency to keep far away from the steel side of the border line, the part indicated as “the damaged area of the instant orchard” in the attached location map of the instant orchard (hereinafter “the damaged area”) is compared to the surrounding area.
B. From July 28, 2005 to June 28, 2006, the Defendant carried out a stabilization project of the instant reclamation site (hereinafter “instant project”) for about 11 months. The content of the said project was to ensure that the water produced from the landfill site is not leaked out by installing a concrete convergence wall of the upper part of the parking lot and the vertical cutting wall around the reclamation site.
C. On June 2012, at the time of the on-site investigation conducted by the Rural Development Administration, most of the instant victims were extracted from or was in a state immediately before the death, and such a situation has no significant change until the date of closing argument in the instant case.
On June 2012, the Rural Development Administration decided that “the direct cause of the death of the fruit trees in the affected area of this case is a ppuri test by fruit-proof,” and the main cause was “the quantity of soil drain water”, and consistently expressed the opinion that “the drainage facilities should be improved since the water pollution in the affected area is the main cause of the death of the fruit trees and the fact inquiry by the first instance court from June 2012 to the date of the first instance court’s inquiry.”
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 6 evidence, Eul evidence 3 and 4 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the first instance court's agencies for promoting agricultural development.