1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. From June 21, 1994, the Plaintiff owned a factory site of 998 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned land”) in Seocho-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Incheon, and operated a marina manufacturing business with a factory on its ground.

From October 31, 2007, the Defendant owned the land owned by the Plaintiff, the 41m2 in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu (hereinafter “Defendant-owned land”).

B. The Plaintiff used the land owned by the Defendant as a way of transporting timber, etc. to grow back to a second line from the time of running his business in the land owned by the Plaintiff.

C. On February 19, 2014, the Defendant, on the land owned by the Defendant, loaded signboards, wood, changeers, vehicles, etc. on the land owned by the Defendant so that the Plaintiff could not transport timber on the land owned by the Defendant and obstructed the Plaintiff’s work of transporting timber by force.

The judgment of suspension of sentence was rendered on December 19, 2014 after being prosecuted for a crime of interference with business (Sacheon District Court Decision 2014 High Court Decision 2014 High Court Decision 890) and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 33 through 36, 38, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 4 and 14, and the purport of the whole testimony and arguments of the first instance court E

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Defendant interfered with the Plaintiff’s horse transportation business by blocking the passage along which signboards, lumber, changeers, vehicles, etc. on the land owned by the Defendant to contribute to the second round line.

As a result, the Plaintiff failed to transport the horses to the customer at once, and the Plaintiff failed to transport the horses to the customer.

1. A total of KRW 92,808,750 on each customer’s forecast income entered in “the details of losses related to the expected revenues” was not obtained, and attached Form 2

2. The details of penalty for breach of contract were paid to each customer in total of KRW 114,400,000 as penalty for breach of contract, and attached Form 3

3. Other loss details include KRW 3,00,000 for additional costs arising from emergency supply, such as the description, and the sum total of KRW 25,600,000 stored in the Plaintiff’s warehouse.