1. The Defendant: (a) 2,694,400 won to Plaintiff A; (b) 2,574,400 won to Plaintiff B; (c) 3,928,000 won to Plaintiff C; and (d) 3,74.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff A and B are the co-owners and residents of J apartment in Busan Dong-gu G (hereinafter the above two apartment buildings in each of the above apartment buildings in Busan Dong-gu) respectively. The current status of ownership and residence of each of the above apartment buildings in each of the above apartment buildings in J apartment in Busan Dong-gu is as stated in the "Name" and the corresponding "Dongho Lake" column. The defendant is also the implementer and the contractor who newly constructs a L apartment with 414 Dong-dong 1,758 of the ground floor above the second apartment in Busan Dong-gu, Busan Dong-gu, Busan, which is adjacent to each of the above apartment buildings in this case.

B. On September 2014, the Defendant building of this case completed the structural frame of outer walls.

On the other hand, each apartment and the defendant building of this case are located within the general residential area.

C. The change of sunshine time as of the dong Day of each apartment of the instant apartment before and after the construction of the instant apartment building is as shown in the attached Table 2.

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-3, 19, 105, 116, 119, and 124, the result of the emotional M’s appraisal, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. 1) The establishment of liability for damages shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances, such as the degree of damage, the nature of the damaged interest and its social assessment, the purpose of the damaged interest, the regional nature of the damaged building, the right to use the land, the possibility of preventing damage and avoiding damage, the possibility of avoiding damage, and the progress of negotiations, in a case where a resident on the adjoining land suffers any disadvantage that the direct light light is cut off due to the new construction of a building, and the new construction of a new building, in order to be evaluated as an illegal and unlawful harmful act beyond the scope of legitimate exercise of right. Whether the obstruction of light goes beyond the tolerance level generally accepted by social norms, the degree of damage, the nature of the damaged interest and its social assessment, the purpose of the damaged interest and its social assessment, the use of the damaged building, the relationship with the land use, the possibility of preventing