1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The plaintiff sought reimbursement against the defendant for defect repair costs, intrusion and computer replacement costs, consolation money, and appraisal costs. The court of first instance dismissed the part of the claim for appraisal costs, and partly accepted the remainder of the claim, and dismissed the remainder of the claim.

Since only the defendant appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance, the subject of the judgment of this court is limited to the claim for damages and consolation money in relation to the cost of repair of defects, the cost of intrusion and the cost of replacement of computers, excluding the cost of appraisal dismissed

2. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff is the owner of Busan Jin-gu Busan apartment D (hereinafter "the plaintiff apartment"), who resides in the above apartment, and the defendant is the owner of the same apartment E (hereinafter "the defendant apartment"), the upper house of which is the same apartment E (hereinafter "the defendant apartment").

B. From September 2017, the Plaintiff’s apartment house began to suffer water leakages in the bedrooms, the ceiling, etc., and due to this, part of the ceiling and walls in the Plaintiff’s apartment house was contaminated and damaged.

(hereinafter referred to as “the number of cases”). C.

As a result of the appraisal of the water leakage in this case, it was found that the high level of infiltration, etc. occurred on the upper part of the waterproof layer as the water level increased and the high level of the water level of the Defendant’s apartment, and the high quality of the water level of the water level exceeded the waterproof line due to the high level of the water level, and the high level of the water level of the Defendant’s apartment into the Plaintiff’s apartment through the equal surface of the tent structure structure or the electric cable duct, and through the electric cable duct, it was found that the Defendant’s apartment was polluted with the Plaintiff’s apartment and damaged such contamination and damage as the preceding paragraph.

On March 2019, the plaintiff is on the part of the pollution and damage of the plaintiff's apartment.