logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2019.05.29 2017가합51177
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The defendant's attached Table 1's "party to the case" is the amount for each plaintiff (appointed party) and the appointed party to the attached Table 1's seal.

Reasons

1. Presumed factual basis

A. Party 1) The Plaintiffs are Q apartments (hereinafter “Plaintiff apartments”) located on three parcels, other than P land in Chuncheon-si, Chuncheon-si.

[Attachment 2] The term “household” in the annexed Table 2 is the reconstruction maintenance project association that newly constructs AA apartment (hereinafter “Defendant apartment”) with the size of 2nd underground and 123 households on one parcel, other than the land adjacent to the direction of due south of the Plaintiff apartment. 2) The Defendant is the reconstruction project association that newly constructs the apartment of the size of 12th and 20th and 123 households (hereinafter “Defendant apartment”) on one parcel, other than the land adjacent to the direction of due south of the Plaintiff apartment.

B. The current status of the Plaintiff’s apartment and the Defendant’s apartment site, and the separation distance, etc. are as follows: (a) the five and twenty AB apartment units had been constructed prior to the construction of the Defendant apartment site; (b) the arrangement of the Plaintiff’s apartment and the Defendant’s apartment, and the horizontal and vertical location relationship are as shown in [Attachment 3 subparags. 1, 2, and 3.

3) On August 29, 2017, the Defendant completed the structural construction of the Defendant apartment building. The Defendant completed the structural construction of the Defendant apartment building. The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, and evidence Nos. 1 through 10, 14 (including the branch number if there is a serial number; the same applies hereinafter

each entry or video of this Court, the result of the commission of appraisal by an appraiser AC of this Court, the purport of the entire pleadings

2. The plaintiffs asserted that they had secured a sufficient amount of sunshine before the new construction of the defendant apartment. However, as the defendant newly constructed the defendant apartment building adjacent to the direction of due south of the plaintiff apartment building, the plaintiffs suffered property damage and mental suffering that fall in the value of the apartment's property due to their infringement of the right not to infringe upon the right to sunshine, the right to mutual assistance, and the right not to infringe upon the privacy.

Therefore, with respect to the defendant, property damage caused by infringement of right of sunshine (the money stated in the "daylight" in the attached Table 2), property damage caused by infringement of right of sunshine (the money stated in the "soft" in the attached Table 2), property damage caused by infringement of right of privacy (the money stated in the attached Table 2) and passive damage attached Table 2.

arrow