1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

1. Around January 11, 2013, the Defendant asserted that the Defendant requested construction of water leakage inspection and water leakage prevention to “D” operated by the co-defendant C of the first instance trial as water drained in the part of the Defendant’s apartment house type light. After conducting water leakage inspection, C agreed that construction of water leakage prevention cost should be borne by the Defendant as the Plaintiff’s share of water leakage in the 201st floor and the 101st floor part of the public toilet XL’s middle part on the 201st floor owned by the Plaintiff and the 101st floor part on the 101st floor owned by the Defendant. Accordingly, the Defendant agreed between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff that “if the Plaintiff cooperates with the construction of water leakage prevention in the 201 toilet and does not raise any objection, the Defendant shall pay KRW 1.2 million of the water leakage prevention cost to C.

However, unlike the above agreement, the construction was suspended on January 15, 2013 due to the Plaintiff’s failure to cooperate in water leakage prevention works. Since the construction was delayed due to opening of the toilets set forth in 14 days or 101 by the Defendant, the Defendant’s agreement on the burden of water leakage prevention expenses was null and void, or the Defendant’s verbal termination notification was terminated on January 15, 2013.

However, since the above water leakage actually occurred from a TW-type valve connected to 201 pages of the Plaintiff’s house, the Plaintiff shall pay the Defendant a total of KRW 1.2 million for water leakage prevention construction cost, KRW 5 million for additional construction cost incurred due to the Plaintiff’s obstruction of construction, and KRW 3 million for mental suffering due to the Plaintiff’s obstruction of construction. Even if the above water leakage occurred not on the side of 201 but at the intermediate point of 201 and 101 for the first time, the Plaintiff shall pay the Defendant a total of KRW 6 million for the above construction cost, KRW 50 million for additional construction cost due to the Plaintiff’s obstruction of construction, and KRW 3 million for consolation money.

2. Determination

A. We examine the judgment on the claim of construction cost and additional construction cost, and examine the purport of the entire pleadings in the testimony of the witness C at the trial.