1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 115,000 to the Plaintiff, and Defendant B with respect thereto from November 8, 2014, and Defendant C with respect to the same.

1. Occurrence of and restrictions on liability for damages;

A. Facts 1) The Plaintiff and the Defendants are the building of Ulsan-gu G Apartment Building (hereinafter referred to as the “instant condominium building”).

) The Plaintiff is a sectional owner (Plaintiff: underground heading, Defendant B: 104, Defendant C: 106, Defendant D: 204, Defendant E: 205, Defendant F: 206), and Defendant F: 2) on July 3, 2014, acquired the ownership of the underground heading (hereinafter referred to as “instant underground shopping district”) among the instant aggregate building in order to operate the Taedok Province, and operated Taedodok from July 5, 2014 to July 30, 2014, and from August 6, 2014.

In the instant underground shopping mall, there is an inspection tool that can be opened and closed, and thus, it was possible to check and clean the e-mail and hydrogen of the sewage pipes in question. However, the Plaintiff closed the inspection tool while performing the said e-mail work.

(Attachment 2) The external sewage management officer of the instant aggregate building was obstructed on August 11, 2014, and due to which, as a result, the worn-out rubber strawing of the said small-out tool was pushed down, water leakage occurred from the ceiling of the instant underground shopping mall (hereinafter referred to as “the primary accident”).

(2) On August 12, 2014, the Plaintiff requested the Hnit Facility I to repair the wastewater, which was found in the sewage pipe while the I repaired, has flown at once with the ceiling of the instant underground shopping mall, etc. (hereinafter “the second accident”).

1) The Defendants and other owners of the instant condominiums, including the Defendants, paid KRW 80,00 to I for the cost of replacing the worn-out Tyle and hydrogen, creating a new inspection tool, and cleaning the external sewage pipe. [This case’s divided owners of the instant condominiums, including the Defendants, paid KRW 80,00 to I for the following reasons: (a) the fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, A 1, 2, 3, B 1, 3-7

B. According to Article 10(1) of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings, common areas belong to the co-ownership of all sectional owners, which is a sectional owner of the instant aggregate building.