1. The part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid under the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. The court's reasoning concerning this part of the basic facts is the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance.

It shall be quoted by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant's apartment's living room bend in the defendant's apartment space with water flow, and that the plaintiff's new fish, living room, inner wall, and ceiling are icely constructed, and the toilet bend in the toilet bend, etc. The defendant's apartment owner's payment of repair cost of KRW 1035,000 and consolation money of KRW 2 million is sought.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that the defendant cannot be deemed to be the exclusive portion of the defendant, and even though the section for exclusive use is the only part of the defendant, it is due to the negligence of the tenant D et al. who neglected the floor of the living room to the degree that the floor of the living room is spoiled (the possessor who has the primary responsibility fails to prove the reason for exemption of the possessor who has the primary responsibility) and that the defendant

In light of the overall purport of the pleadings as to evidence Gap's evidence Nos. 1, 2, 7, and 8 as mentioned above, the plaintiff discovered ices due to water leakage in the toilet ceiling in the plaintiff's apartment room on June 2013 and notified the lessee of the defendant's apartment complex of the fact that the plaintiff requested repair on or around August 2013, and F did not start repair, but the water leakage and ice have been further expanded as mentioned above. The defendant sent the repairer around January 2, 2014 through February 2014, and inspected the defendant's apartment house 2 and three times, but the reason for water leakage is not directly revealed. However, the appraiser is deemed to have been waterproofd with the part of the defendant's apartment house entering the door door of the defendant's apartment room at the time of flooding construction, and the presumed part of the defendant's apartment zone at the time of the investigation into the scene of the defendant's apartment zone at the time of flooding construction.