1. Of the actions filed by the plaintiff (appointed party) and the selected party, the part of the claim for preventive measures against noise caused by opening noise.

Basic Facts

Plaintiff

In Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, the designated parties reside in the multi-household houses for multi-household, and the defendants live in the multi-household houses for the above houses and are growing pet dog from around 2012.

The Plaintiff sent to the Defendants the content-certified mail to the effect that “the Plaintiff is highly suffering due to noise of pet dogs and is unable to properly locked,” and filed a report with the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Human Rights Center on the damage caused by pet noise, or received a civil petition with the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Human Rights Center.

The plaintiff was treated in a hospital due to neutic macy caused by sound, and F, the plaintiff, was suffering from extreme mental pain due to the noise of leutical dogs, and was moving to an adjacent rooftop.

【In the absence of dispute, there is no ground for recognition, the entries in Gap 2-7 evidence, the purport of the entire pleadings, and the plaintiff and the designated parties' assertion that the plaintiff and the designated parties suffered mental damage exceeding the bounds of socially accepted norms due to sound from which the pet dog of the defendants was prevented. The defendants are obliged to take measures to remove or prevent interference with the plaintiff and the designated parties' daily lives due to sound from which the pet dog was prevented, and to pay consolation money due to joint tort by the plaintiff and the designated parties.

The purport of the claim in civil litigation is to specify the content and scope of the claim in a way that clearly recognizes the content and scope of the claim (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2007Da53785, Nov. 12, 2009; 201Da17090, Sept. 8, 2011). As such, a lawsuit for which the claim is not specifically specified is unlawful.

In light of the above legal principles, ex officio, the part concerning the claim for the removal of noise interference and prevention measures among the instant lawsuit is legitimate, and the Plaintiff’s purport of the claim is prohibited.