손해배상(기)
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, Plaintiff H’s successor to the amount equivalent to the following additional payments:
1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the overall purport of the pleadings by Gap evidence Nos. 17 and 25 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), by the appraiser N in the first instance trial, and by the Japanese Appraisal Corporation No. 1 (hereinafter the "Japan Appraisal Corporation") and the results of the appraisal supplementation (hereinafter the "the results of appraisal and the results of the appraisal supplementation").
The defendant is a company that operates the sales business of the apartment of the Daegu-gu Seoul-gu apartment complex (hereinafter "the apartment of this case") entrusted by the joint defendant company in the first instance trial with the development of the partnership industry, and the joint defendant promotion company in the first instance trial is the contractor of the apartment of this case, and the plaintiffs and the plaintiff succeeding intervenors (hereinafter "the succeeding intervenors") have the ownership or shares of each real estate adjacent to the above apartment at the time of completion of the highest floor of the apartment of this case (hereinafter "the damaged building of this case") in attached Table 2 attached hereto.
B. The instant apartment building is composed of five units, with a total of 24 to 29 units above ground, and a total of 49 units above ground, and was completed on July 31, 2014, and was constructed adjacent to the south side of the instant damaged building.
C. On July 29, 2014, Plaintiff D (Withdrawal; hereinafter “Withdrawal”) completed the registration of ownership transfer for the real estate owned by the principal among the instant damaged buildings, respectively, with respect to the shares of 1/3 to the succeeding Intervenor I on March 4, 2013, and the withdrawing Plaintiff J and Nonparty K completed the registration of ownership transfer for the real estate owned by the principal among the damaged buildings in this case.
Due to the construction of the apartment of this case, the sunlight hours of the damaged building of this case were changed as shown in the attached Table 3, the “day before and after the new construction,” and the “day after the new construction,” respectively.
2. The plaintiffs and the succeeding intervenors were newly constructed the apartment house of this case by the plaintiffs and the succeeding intervenors.