beta
Text
1. As to the Plaintiff A’s KRW 4,250,00, Plaintiff B, C, and D, respectively, and each of the said KRW 2,00,000 for each of the said money.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff B, C, and D are children born between F and the Plaintiff.
B. On August 25, 1997, Plaintiff A completed the registration of transfer of ownership with respect to G forest land of 1010 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) in Seopopo-si, Seopo-si, Seopo-si, 1997, and Plaintiff A buried his remains under Dongbane trees (hereinafter “instant Dongb tree”) where her husband died in around 2009, and buried his remains into the instant land after cremationing them.
C. On April 3, 2014, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to H 2179 square meters of land adjacent to the instant land (hereinafter “instant adjacent land”). From September 2014 to November 2014, in the process of constructing a new building on the instant adjacent land, the Defendant damaged the kingkum tree and the instant village boom tree, etc., planted on the instant land during the process of constructing a new building on the instant adjacent land.
(hereinafter “instant damaged act.” 【In the absence of dispute as to the ground for recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, and Eul evidence No. 1 (Each number omitted), the purport of the entire entries and arguments.
2. Determination
A. 1) According to the fact of recognition of liability, the defendant is responsible for compensating the damages suffered by the plaintiffs due to the damage of this case. 2) The defendant asserts that the damage of this case should offset the negligence because the damage of this case is highly attributable to the negligence of management of the plaintiffs. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the damage of this case resulted from the negligence of management of the plaintiffs. Thus, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.
B. 1) The Plaintiff A, at the time of the Defendant’s act of damaging the property damage, damaged 3 glus and glusium 27 glusium, which were planted on the instant land, including the instant glusium at the time of the Defendant’s act of damaging the property damage. As such, the Defendant shall compensate the Plaintiff, the owner of the tree, for KRW 43,800,000 [1,40,000 x 27 glus] amounting to the property damage.