1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. On February 2013, the Plaintiffs asserted that water leakage occurred due to the crack of hot water pipes in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Building 1001, which was owned by the Defendant, and damage was inflicted on the ceiling, door mold, internal walls, etc. of the lower floor that was owned by the Plaintiffs at the time.

The plaintiffs requested the Korea T&D Design Corporation to repair the above water leakage damage, which caused 96 million won in estimated amount of compensation, and claimed 27 million won in advance among them, and also suffered mental suffering due to water leakage damage. The plaintiffs claimed 3 million won in consolation money.

2. Determination

A. A. On February 2013, the determination on the claim for remuneration and construction cost was made on or around February 2, 2013, it is recognized that there was no dispute between the parties, or that the Defendant transferred KRW 3.5 million to the Plaintiff’s account in the name of the Plaintiff around May 7, 2013, to the Plaintiff’s account in the entire pleadings, due to the crack of hot water pipes from the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Building 1001, which was owned by the Defendant, as at the time of the occurrence of leakage.

However, as to whether the amount of damage suffered by the plaintiffs due to the above leakage reaches KRW 27 million, it is not sufficient to recognize only the evidence submitted by the plaintiffs, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

[In particular, a quotation (No. 3) of L&D Design Co., Ltd., which was submitted as evidence for the plaintiffs' damage amounting to KRW 96 million, is prepared for the estimation of the interior works and the F.C. repair works of the D building No. 901 on December 9, 2008, prior to the occurrence of water leakage, and cannot be used as evidence for the damage amount above]. Therefore, the above assertion is without merit.

B. In general, in a case where a property right is infringed due to a tort of another person, the right to claim consolation money is also deemed to have been restored by compensation for such property damage. Therefore, the right to claim consolation money is accordingly.