1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the building listed in paragraph (1) of the attached Table 1 of the Gwanak-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City List C Ground (hereinafter referred to as “First building”), and the Defendant B is the owner of the building listed in paragraph (2) of the attached Table 2 of the attached Table 4 of the Gwanak-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City D Ground

B. Defendant B filed a report with Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “Defendant Gwanak-gu”) to change the use of the part of 69.29 square meters of the part of 125.62 square meters of the 2nd floor of the building 3rd in the building, from “ neighboring residential facilities,” to “self-housing” and to extend the 4th floor (45.27 square meters of the total area). Since September 2012, Defendant B started the extension work.

C. On October 5, 2012, Defendant Gwanak-gu approved the use of the third floor and the extension of the fourth floor of the second floor of the building.

After the use approval of the Defendant-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Defendant B extended the building No. 2 to a size of approximately KRW 136.86 square meters in excess of the originally reported extension area on the 4th floor of the building, and additionally extended the 19 square meters of the rooftop.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant illegally extended portion”). E.

The defendant Gwanak-gu ordered the defendant B to remove the illegal extension portion of this case and imposed a non-performance penalty.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 4, 11 through 13, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 to 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's ground for claim

A. The primary claim was made by Defendant B, by illegally expanding the building No. 2, that led to the failure to secure a sunlight and co-help net on the building No. 1 owned by the Plaintiff, and that invasion of privacy occurred.

Accordingly, on September 25, 2012, the Plaintiff sought the suspension of construction and the removal of the part of the construction by notifying the illegal extension of the second building to the Defendant Gwanak-gu. However, the Defendant Gwanak-gu did not take any measures against the intention or negligence of the public official in charge and did not use the second building in violation of the criteria for permission prescribed in the Building Permission Act.