1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. On September 25, 2016, the Defendants intruded into the Plaintiff’s house Mancheon-si, Yacheon-si, and brought well-in by using the electric saw to the Plaintiff’s possession of the Plaintiff. Defendant B was sentenced to a fine of KRW 500,00,00 for the above residential intrusion and damage of property, and the judgment became final and conclusive around that time, without dispute between the parties, or by taking full account of the overall purport of the pleadings in the entries in evidence No. 1-6, No. 3, and No. 5, No. 1-5 (hereinafter “instant trees”).

B. In light of the above facts of recognition, the defendants are liable to compensate for damages suffered by the plaintiff due to the tort committed by well smelling the trees of this case owned by the plaintiff without the plaintiff's permission.

2. Scope of liability for damages

A. Ordinary damages suffered by the Plaintiff due to the cutting of trees shall be the amount equivalent to the expenses incurred in planting trees similar to the previous trees and restoring them to their original state.

B. In full view of the purport of the arguments in Gap evidence 1-1-6, Gap evidence 1-2-1, 2-2, and Eul evidence 6, it can be acknowledged that the total cost of KRW 8 million is incurred in planting 3 glus, glus, glus, and glus, each of which is similar to the trees of this case, and restoring the original state to the original state, and against this, Eul evidence 1-2 is not trustable, and there is no counter-proof otherwise.

C. Therefore, the Defendants, a joint tortfeasor, jointly committed the said eight million won and the Plaintiff, as sought by the Plaintiff, shall promote the litigation from February 27, 2018, which is the day following the date of delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case, to November 2, 2018, the date of adjudication of the first instance court, which deemed reasonable to dispute the existence and scope of the Defendants’ performance obligations, 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act, and from the following day to the day of full payment.