1. For the plaintiffs, the defendant CL district Housing Reconstruction Project Association listed in the attached Table 1 list "Defendant CL district."

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiffs are the sectional owners or residents of each subparagraph of the CN apartment in Busan Dong-gu CM (hereinafter "the plaintiff's apartment complex"). The current status of ownership or residence of each subparagraph is as stated in the corresponding column of "ownership or residence relationship" as shown in the attached Table 1. The defendant CL District Housing Reconstruction Project Association (hereinafter "the defendant association") is an implementer of the housing reconstruction project of 32 stories and 693 households of 32 stories and 32 stories and 493 households (hereinafter "the building in this case") adjacent to the plaintiffs' apartment complex in Busan Dong-gu, Busan, Dong-gu, 1059. The defendant corporation (hereinafter "the defendant corporation") is the starting construction of the building in this case.

B. The instant building was commenced on August 3, 2012, and completed the structural frame of the outer wall around September 2014.

Meanwhile, the plaintiffs' apartment buildings within Class 2 general residential area, and the buildings in this case are within Class 3 general residential area where the construction of high-rise apartment houses is allowed.

C. The change of sunshine hours based on the wintering date of the instant apartment before and after the construction of the instant building is as shown in the attached Table 2.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The judgment on the claim for damages arising from infringement of the right to sunshine of the Plaintiff A, D, E, G, H, P, R, U, Y, AC, AK, AK, AL, AO, AR, AV, AY, BC, BD, BG, and H

A. In a case where a new construction of a new building, the criteria for determining the infringement of the right to sunlight against the Defendant Union, thereby causing disadvantages to a resident on the neighboring land to block direct light, such new construction, in order to be evaluated as an illegal and harmful act beyond the scope of legitimate exercise of right, the degree of the obstruction of light should exceed the generally accepted limit under the generally accepted social norms. Whether the obstruction of light exceeds the generally accepted limit under the social norms, the nature of the damage, and the extent of damage, and its nature.