1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 5,810,297 with respect to the Plaintiff and the period from May 17, 2014 to August 28, 2015.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government land and the above ground buildings (hereinafter “instant building”). The Defendants are co-owners of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Gangnam-gu land adjacent to the instant building, who newly build a “F building with the size of 3rd underground and 15th ground surface” on the said land (hereinafter “instant construction”). The mobilization construction industry corporation (hereinafter “cover construction”) is the contractor of the said construction project.

B. The Defendants entered into the instant contract and the progress of the construction work; 1) As to the mobilization construction and the instant construction work, the construction period from September 2013 to February 28, 2015 (hereinafter “instant contract”).

(2) At the time of filing the instant lawsuit ( April 28, 2014), the ground-breaking construction was completed during the instant construction, and the underground structure construction was conducted.

C. The ground of the instant building, such as the subsidence, crack, etc., of the instant building, is subsidenced as shown in the present annexed list, and there was rupture on the outer wall, and damage to the interior walls of the instant building, such as water leakage, etc.

【Ground for recognition】 In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, and 3-1, 2-3-2, Gap evidence 4-1 through 3, and the appraisal result and additional appraisal result of Gap evidence G (hereinafter “appraisal”), the purport of the whole pleadings as to this court’s entrustment of the appraiser’s supplementation and supplementation,

2. The parties' assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendants caused vibration while carrying out the instant construction and caused damage as shown in the attached list of the instant building. 2) The Plaintiff suffered damages equivalent to KRW 100,000,100 in total due to the Defendants’ aforementioned tort, including (i) losses equivalent to the cost of reinforcement and repair, (ii) losses equivalent to the decline in the value of the instant building, and (iii) losses arising from rupture, which occurred due to the lack of underground floors.