1. Defendant D and E jointly share KRW 8,500,000 for the Plaintiffs and those related thereto from December 9, 2017 to October 17, 2018.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs are residents of Pyeongtaek-si’s ground housing (hereinafter “instant housing”).

Plaintiff

A has owned the instant house from December 6, 2007.

Plaintiff

A on May 8, 2016, donated the above land and buildings to Nonparty C and completed the registration of ownership transfer.

B. Defendant D is the owner of Pyeongtaek-si G land, H land, I land, and J land adjacent to the instant housing site (hereinafter “instant adjacent land”). Defendant D and Defendant E, who is said owner, were conducting construction works (hereinafter “instant construction works”). From October 2014 to October 2015, Defendant D and Defendant E, respectively, on the land of H, I, and G, constructing a collective housing of 4th floor above the instant collective housing of a reinforced concrete structure (hereinafter “instant collective housing”).

C. From around 1972, the instant housing site, and I land, G land, and H land were installed with a diameter of 300 meters laid underground from the ground to the ground, and a double oil pipeline of 60 meters in length (hereinafter “instant drainage route”). However, the Plaintiffs have used it as a drainage of daily sewage in their residence.

At the time of constructing the instant apartment house, Defendant D and its children, prevented the distribution of the drainage channel, thereby blocking drainage, installed a concrete retaining wall at the boundary point of land owned by the Plaintiff, which is the starting point of the drainage channel, and currently, the status of blocking the above drainage channel continues.

E. Defendant D and E closed a road leading to I’s land, etc. (hereinafter “instant present condition”) around March 2015 while running the instant construction, and as a result, Defendant E was convicted of a fine of one million won due to traffic obstruction by the Suwon District Court on January 12, 2018 and became final and conclusive (U.S. District Court 2017No3628; hereinafter “the instant conviction judgment”), and the Plaintiff’s temporary injunction against interference with passage filed against Defendant E.