2...

A. The Plaintiff is a resident of a house on the ground of Ulsan-gun B, Ulsan-gun (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On December 31, 2009, the Defendant installed and managed the telecommunications cable (hereinafter “the telecommunications cable”) in the electric poles of the Korea Electric Power Corporation established adjacent to the said house (the part included in the instant land).

The defendant did not obtain the consent of the plaintiff or the right to use the land under the telecommunications cable in installing the above telecommunications cable.

C. The Defendant removed all of the instant communications cables around July 2016 and October 12, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, evidence 3-1, 4-2, Eul evidence 2 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff installed telecommunications cables on the road surface of the instant land without obtaining the Plaintiff’s consent or obtaining the source of authority, and due to such unlawful act by the Defendant, the Plaintiff, a resident of the instant land, was affected by the right to live in the pleasant residential environment, such as interfering with securing the view.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to compensate the plaintiff for consolation money of five million won.

B. In general, in a case where a property right is infringed by a tort of another person, mental suffering shall be deemed to have been recovered from the compensation for such property damage. Thus, in a case where an irrecoverable mental damage was inflicted by compensation for property damage, this is a damage due to special circumstances, and if the perpetrator knew or could have known such circumstances, he/she may claim consolation money for such damage.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Da82507, Mar. 18, 2004). We examine the following: (a) the aforementioned evidence; and (b) the entire entries and arguments of evidence Nos. 5, 6, and 7.