1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 1, 2015, the Plaintiff purchased a large-scale 404 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) in Gyeyang-gu, Gyeyang-gu, Seoyang-gu (hereinafter “Seoul”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer with the Plaintiff and D having the respective shares of 1/2. On January 15, 2016, the Plaintiff newly constructed a single-story detached house on the instant land and completed the registration of ownership transfer thereof.

B. On March 16, 2009, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer in its name with respect to the land size of 533 square meters prior to E, and around November 2016, the Defendant filled up and built retaining walls (hereinafter “instant construction”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence 1, 2, and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) land owned by the Defendant on the north side of the instant land by the Plaintiff, and the high ground was naturally drained into the instant land and the Defendant’s land located on the same part of the Defendant’s land before the instant construction works.

However, a height higher than that reported by the Defendant to the competent authorities in the instant construction works, by piling up a embanking and embankment on the east boundary of the Defendant’s land, the ground was higher than that of the instant land. Accordingly, the excellent naturally flowed was concentrated on the instant land.

Nevertheless, even though the Defendant had a duty of care to prevent outstanding inflows into the land of this case by installing a drainage channel, it has been negligent to do so, thereby concentrating much on the land of this case, and as a result, the housing price of this case was collapsed on July 2017.

Therefore, the defendant has a duty to compensate for damages equivalent to KRW 1,677,00,00 for the amount of the stable repair cost that the plaintiff suffered by the above tort.

(2) The Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff was established over the instant land and the Defendant’s land, and removed the Seocho-gu Pool PE pipe, which performed the drainage function, and was set up on the instant land.