1. The Defendant’s KRW 6,429,440 as well as the annual rate of KRW 5% from May 28, 2015 to November 29, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the Gyeyang-gu Incheon Metropolitan City ground Am apartment house (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s house”), and the Defendant is the owner who newly constructed a factory building of six-story size (hereinafter “Defendant factory”) on the ground of three lots adjoining the above house immediately adjacent to the above house.

B. Nonparty D, the spouse of the Plaintiff, purchased the above apartment house on September 30, 198, and completed the registration of ownership transfer of the above apartment house on November 3, 1988. The Plaintiff was donated the Plaintiff’s house from the above D around February 21, 2005.

C. The defendant factory is located on the south side of the plaintiff's house, and the place where the plaintiff's house and the defendant's factory are located is a quasi industrial area, but apartment and other residence are mixed around.

Plaintiff

Housing has a living room, window 1 and 2 in the direction of the defendant factory, and the change of sunshine hours due to the construction of the defendant factory (mark 1), the change of view (mark 2) and the change of privacy infringement rate (mark 3) are as shown in attached Table 3.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 4, Eul evidence 13 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the result of the court's commission of appraisal to appraiser E, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant's new construction of the defendant factory infringed the right to enjoy sunshine and privacy that the plaintiff had engaged in in the plaintiff's house, and the degree of such infringement constitutes a tort against the plaintiff, which exceeds the tolerance limit under social norms, and thus, the defendant asserts that the defendant has a duty to compensate the plaintiff for property damage amounting to 22,423,400 won and damages for delay.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that there is no infringement of the right to enjoy sunshine exceeding the limit of admission, such as the plaintiff's assertion, and even if domestic affairs are recognized, the plaintiff's claim amount is excessive so that it cannot comply with the plaintiff's

3. Determination

(a) the occurrence of liability for damages;