1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation of this case is as follows: "No evidence No. 2, No. 2, and the plaintiff's assertion cannot be accepted" in Part No. 4, No. 7, and No. 19 of the judgment of the court of first instance, and it is identical to the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is also accepted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

In addition, according to the fact-finding, it is difficult to determine that the waste slate was buried in the land of this case by the public official in charge according to the Plaintiff’s civil petition filing date, as well as the fact-finding on the land of this case, since each image of Gap’s Nos. 2-4, 7, 8, 3-7, 9-1 through 6, Gap’s evidence No. 21-1, 21-2 is insufficient to recognize that the defendant discharged living sewage in the part of the land of this case with the indication of the attached drawing(D), and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the fact-finding of waste in the part(E). In addition, according to the fact-finding on the land of this case, according to the Plaintiff’s civil petition date, it is difficult to determine that the waste slate was buried in the land of this case due to the fact-finding, and there is no evidence to prove that the Defendant discharged the Defendant’s living sewage without permission and buried domestic waste in the Gangnam City community service center, and there is no reason to acknowledge that the Defendant’s claim for compensation for damages.