1. The Defendant’s KRW 79,923,946 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from January 1, 2017 to November 20, 2018, and the following.

1. Under the underlying facts, the following facts do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in each of the descriptions of Gap evidence 1, 2, and evidence 1-12, evidence 3-12, evidence 4-1-5, evidence 6-1-3, and evidence 7.

The Plaintiff is a person who is the owner of DNA telecom (the underground second floor, the 3,196.48 square meters on the ground, 10 square meters on the ground, and 10 square meters on the ground) located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Seocho-gu, and its ground.

B. The Defendant is a new construction contractor constructed by F, which purchased a car maintenance plant on the land of 510.30m2, Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E, which is directly adjacent to the instant telecom.

C. The Defendant, around 2015, concluded a construction contract to remove the said car repair plant from F and construct the two underground and eight-story tourist hotel on the site, and completed the new construction work on or around December 31, 2016 after commencing the removal work from April 21, 2015.

The Plaintiff filed a civil petition with the competent authority over several occasions that the instant construction works caused interference with business due to the occurrence of noise and vibration, and the Defendant was subject to an administrative disposition by the competent authority on the ground of the violation of Article 21(2) of the Noise and Vibration Control Act (the exceeding standard of living noise control) of the Noise and Vibration Control Act (the excess of the standard of living noise control) on September 10, 2015 during the construction period of the instant construction works.

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion of noise and vibration, etc. caused by the instant construction by the Defendant, thereby causing serious business losses, such as reduction of guests and refund of accommodation expenses, etc., which led to the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for business losses incurred during the instant construction period and 10,000,000 won due to tort damages.

3. Determination

(a) In the ordinary construction work involving the occurrence of liability for damages, noise, vibration, dust, etc. have occurred with any construction work in light of the fact that noise, vibration, and dust is accompanied by a certain degree of noise, vibration, and dust.