1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 2,527,820 to Plaintiff A; (b) KRW 564,470 to Plaintiff C; (c) KRW 3,458,120 to Plaintiff D; and (d) KRW 630,340 to Plaintiff E.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs are the owners of each of the instant houses, each of which completed the registration of ownership transfer under their own names, with respect to each of the above Plaintiffs’ addresses in the address column for each of the above Plaintiffs (hereinafter “each of the instant houses”) among H lending of the first and third floors underground in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City.

B. On around 2013, the Defendant newly constructed and completed the “J” apartment of the size of the second and third floors underground (hereinafter “instant apartment”) on the ground of the same land owned by the Defendant and one other (hereinafter “instant site”), which is owned by the Defendant, and completed the registration of initial ownership in relation to each of the above apartment units.

C. The instant apartment building had the right to enjoy sunshine benefits without any impediment on the front side before it was constructed, and had the view opened. However, the instant apartment building was constructed in front of about five meters from the instant apartment building, which led to the infringement of some sunshine benefits and the infringement of view, as seen below.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1 to 6, Gap 2, 3, and 5, each entry, Gap 6, 8-1 to 9, Gap 10-1, 2, and 3's images, the appraisal result, and the purport of the whole pleadings by the appraiser K

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. 1) The relevant legal principles can be legally protected when the owner of land, etc. has value as an objective living benefit, which he/she had enjoyed from the past. In cases where the increase in the number of sunlight generated by blocking sunlight due to the construction of a new building, structure, etc. in the vicinity of the building or structure, namely, the increase in the number of sunlight enjoyed in the land in question has occurred, so that the new construction is deemed an illegal harmful act beyond the scope of legitimate exercise as a legitimate exercise of right, the degree of sunshine should exceed the generally accepted limit under the social norms.