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. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of a shop D (hereinafter “instant shop”) located in B Apartment-gu, Jeonju-si (hereinafter “instant apartment”). The Defendant is the managing body of the instant apartment building composed of the occupants’ representatives of the apartment.

B. The instant apartment site is surrounded by iron pents, and the instant apartment site is located in the apartment site located within the said steel pents, except the entrances of 1st, 2nd (2nd (3nd) and 3rd (3rd).

The nearest entrance in the commercial building of this case is a letter, and the defendant is allowed to enter the commercial building of this case by controlling the access through the door and by obtaining a visit certificate through the door or after door.

C. On August 31, 2017, Nonparty F, who leased the instant commercial building from the Plaintiff and operated the Elaundry Facility, terminated the lease contract with the Plaintiff, and thereafter, continued to operate the business by moving the store to Gdong in the instant apartment site.

【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 2 (including a paper number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff asserted and determined that there was an obstacle to the business of a commercial building on the wind that the Defendant excessively controls the access of external vehicles visiting the instant commercial building by installing a steel pent and blocking machine on the instant apartment building and prohibiting the access of external vehicles via a part entrance. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s freedom of business, right to use site, etc. and right to life was infringed, and the lessee, who operated a laundry on and after August 31, 2017, who renounced the Plaintiff’s store and operated the laundry house, suffered losses from the Plaintiff from not gaining profits equivalent to the rent, since the lessee, who renounced his/her business and canceled the lease contract, was unable to obtain a profit equivalent to the rent. Thus, the Defendant, from September 1, 2017 to December 27, 2017, 3,750,000 won (=750,000 won per month x five months).