1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. According to the counterclaim that was brought at the trial of the court, the plaintiff (a counterclaim defendant).

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment on the defendant’s counterclaim that was brought in the court of first instance to the following two. Thus, it is decided to accept this by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Judgment on the defendant's counterclaim

A. According to the facts of recognition as seen earlier, the Plaintiff, as a joint tortfeasor, who was involved in C’s act of use of electric power as well as aiding and abetting C’s act of use by being aware of C’s act of use of electric power, is obligated to compensate the Defendant for the damages incurred to the Defendant’s electric utility fee amounting to KRW 51,257,509 and damages for delay thereof, as well as to compensate the Defendant for damages incurred to the Defendant’s loss of electric power fee amounting to KRW 17,476,779 and damages for delay due to electric power failure on the stairs and toilets of the instant building pursuant to Article 44 of the former Terms and Conditions of Use.

B. Therefore, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay to the Defendant damages for delay at a rate of 20% per annum under the Civil Act from January 17, 2014 to September 18, 2014, with respect to KRW 68,734,288 (amount of penalty) and KRW 17,476,779 (amount of penalty) and KRW 51,257,509 (amount of penalty), which is the termination date of tort, as the Defendant seeks, for KRW 68,734,28 (amount of penalty) and KRW 51,257,50 (amount of penalty).

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit, and the defendant's counterclaim raised in the court of first instance is asserted.