The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

1. As to the grounds of appeal on abuse of rights, in a case where a landowner’s act of installing a structure on his/her own land constitutes an abuse of rights in relation to the owner of a neighboring building, and thereby, the owner of a neighboring building may seek removal of the structure against the landowner by exercising the right to claim removal of interference based on the ownership of the building.

On the other hand, the exercise of the right is to give pain to the other party, and there is no benefit to the person who exercises the right, and if it can be objectively deemed that it violates social order, the exercise of the right is not allowed as an abuse of rights, and the subjective requirement for the exercise of the right can be confirmed by objective circumstances, which show that the exercise of the right lacks legitimate interest of the right holder, and whether the exercise of the right constitutes abuse of rights should be determined by individual and specific cases.

(see Supreme Court Decision 2014Da42967, Oct. 30, 2014). Based on its stated reasoning, the lower court determined that the Defendant’s act of installing steel railing and steel pipe, steel pipe, booming, large powder powder, etc. around the instant building constituted abuse of rights as it goes beyond the bounds of legitimate exercise of rights.

Examining the records in accordance with the aforementioned legal principles, the lower court’s judgment is justifiable.

There is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles on abuse of rights.

The precedent cited in the grounds of appeal is different from the case of this case, and it is not appropriate to invoke this case.

2. The interest in the lawsuit.