1.(a)

The Defendants jointly set forth the Plaintiff KRW 12,980,880 and KRW 10,886,70 among them, from March 26, 2020 to February 2, 200.

Basic Facts

[Ground for Recognition: Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 through 6 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply)

The purport of each entry, video, and oral argument is that the Plaintiff is the owner of G Apartment (the 40th and 41th floor structure; hereinafter “I”) No. 40th (the 40th and 41st floor structure”) located in the G Apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”). The Defendants jointly own and occupy the 42th floor Hho (hereinafter “H”) of the instant apartment.

However, around September 2019, the Plaintiff’s first toilet, corridor, and living room ceiling, internal stairs, and the test ceiling (hereinafter “instant water”) occurred.

In light of the above macroscopic evidence, Gap evidence Nos. 7 and 8, the appraisal result by the appraiser J, and the purport of the entire arguments in this court as to the above appraiser's fact-finding, the water leakage of this case was leaked due to the leakage of water generated from the waterproof layer defect in the Htetra floor, and the plaintiff suffered from water leakage of the Htetra floor under 1, a lower-rises through the steverative part, and the damage compensation and water leakage prevention work of this case were conducted on September 24, 2019. The construction cost of this case was 10,886,70 won, and the damage compensation and water leakage prevention work of this case was 5,39,39,400 won totaled KRW 16,226,86,80,700 + KRW 539,400, Oct. 5, 2019.

Judgment

According to the above facts, since the water leakage of this case occurred due to the water leakage of Hho Lake floor owned by the Defendants, the Defendants are liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the damages incurred by the water leakage of this case pursuant to Article 758 of the Civil Act.

However, the circumstances that recognize the overall purport of the oral argument among the aforementioned macroscopic evidence, that is, the apartment of this case has been approved on November 12, 2010, and an on-site investigation by an appraiser was conducted on November 28, 2020, and the building attached to piping pipes was defective.