Of the disposition of the first instance judgment, including the plaintiff's claim extended by this court, it is against the defendants in Paragraph 2.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the real estate listed in the attached Table 1 (hereinafter “instant site”) and the real estate listed in the attached Table 2 (hereinafter “instant housing”).

B. Defendant B Co., Ltd (hereinafter “Defendant B”) (hereinafter “Defendant B”) performed a new construction work of non-business facilities and non-business facilities (hereinafter “instant construction work”) on the ground of 2nd underground floors and 10 square meters above 506 square meters adjacent to the instant housing between September 2014 to October 2015, 2015, on the ground of f.506 square meters adjacent to the instant housing.

C. From the end of November 2014 to the end of July 2015, Defendant E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant E”) newly built a collective housing of six stories above the ground level on the ground of 443 square meters adjacent to the instant housing (hereinafter “instant construction”) and adjacent to the instant housing from the end of the end of November 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 7 (including branch numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply), the result of the on-site inspection by the first instance court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. While Defendant B, while performing the ground-breaking construction in the first construction process of this case, was obligated to prevent danger and injury caused by the collapse of land by preventing the deterioration of the foundation or the structural proof of the ground of this case, and avoiding rapid drainage, Defendant B neglected such duty. Accordingly, in the process of the said ground-breaking construction, groundwater underground in the instant site was discharged from the ground-breaking construction site rapidly, and the instant site was invaded, and there was a rupture in the instant housing.

B. Defendant E also violated the duty to prevent noise, vibration, dust, etc. and the duty to install a safety net, and the duty to prevent damage to neighboring buildings during the 2nd construction process of this case. Accordingly, the instant site was invaded, and there was rupture in the instant housing.

C. The above violation of joint duty by Defendant B and Defendant E caused the invasion of the instant land and the crack of the instant housing, and among the instant housing.