1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the Seo-gu, Seoan-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seoul, 426 square meters, D large 49 square meters, and E large 65 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”); and the Defendant is the owner of the F large 1,512 square meters adjacent to the Plaintiff’s land (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”).

B. On May 1, 2016, the Defendant agreed with G on the following terms in relation to the Defendant’s land, and reported it to the head of Seo-gu, Chungcheongnam-si as the owner of the building permit, and G as the de facto manager of the building permit.

A (Defendant) and B (G) of the Agreement on Agreement shall enter into and faithfully implement an agreement with each other as follows:

In granting a building permit and new construction of a commercial building in 450 square meters (Defendant land) of the F site in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Incheon and Eul shall comply with an agreement for consultation.

1. Construction of a commercial building shall be carried out after obtaining a building permit for the Defendant’s land A;

2. The period of new construction works shall be from August 1, 2016 to April 30, 2017;

3. Dried building of new building shall be constructed with 455 square meters above ground second floor;

4. The total construction cost shall be 1.25 million won (including value-added tax) in total;

The construction cost shall be borne in full.

All taxes and public charges shall be executed at the expense of Eul.

5. When the learning and cooperation of Gap is needed during construction works, Gap shall provide the maximum cooperation.

6. He shall offset and dispose of the construction cost of B with the rental proceeds for a period of six years from the date of completion.

7.B shall transfer all the building and other facilities to A ten years after the completion of the collection of the construction cost.

C. On August 21, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a complaint with the competent investigation agency on the charge of property damage with the Defendant and G, stating that “The Defendant and G, while carrying out the construction of the foregoing paragraph (b) above, damaged 7glus, water-supply facilities, and 20 halians owned by the Plaintiff, thereby damaging the Plaintiff’s property equivalent to KRW 17,00,000,000.” However, the Prosecutor issued a disposition against the Defendant and G, which was suspected of having a defect in evidence, against the Defendant and G.

Daejeon District Public Prosecutor's Office in 2017.