손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff (Appointed)'s claim of this case is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff (Appointeds) and the designated parties (hereinafter “Plaintiffs, etc.”) are the occupants of the Da main apartment complex D (hereinafter “instant apartment”) in Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si.
B. In order to construct the F building on the ground of the land adjoining to the apartment site of this case, Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”) and Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C”) entered into a contract for the said new construction (hereinafter “instant construction work”), Defendant B, and C, from October 2016, during the instant construction work.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, purport of whole pleading
2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion
A. The Defendants asserted by the Plaintiff et al. suffered excessive noise, dust, vibration, and dust in the course of performing the instant construction work, including ground-breaking construction, civil engineering construction, and structural construction, and caused the Plaintiff et al. to suffer pain exceeding the tolerance limit due to the passage of construction vehicles. Moreover, the Plaintiff et al. infringed on the right to sunshine, view, and privacy of the Plaintiff et al.
Therefore, the defendants are obligated to pay the plaintiff et al. the consolation money of 2 million won each due to the above illegal act.
B. To recognize the Defendants’ liability to compensate for damages caused by the instant construction works against the Plaintiff, etc., the degree of interference with life due to the instant construction works, such as noise, dust, dust, sunshine, sunshine, view, and invasion of privacy, shall exceed the bounds of social norms, or the limit of tolerance. Whether any damage exceeding the limit of tolerance, specifically taking into account all the circumstances, including the nature and degree of damage, the public nature of the damaged interest, the nature and form of the harmful act, the public nature of the harmful act, the public nature of the harmful act, the possibility of the perpetrator’s preventive measures or the possibility of avoiding damage, whether the said damage was violated under public law, the characteristics and purpose of the land where the land exists