beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants and the claims added by this court are all dismissed.
2. Appeal;
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is that of the court of first instance, except where the plaintiff added a judgment on the claim added by this court, and thus, it is consistent with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Additional determination
A. The remaining Defendants except Defendant B’s assertion (hereinafter “non-Subrogation Defendants”) are the representatives of direct damage Dongs ( Qdong, Rdong, Sdong, and Tdong) from among the P Apartments, and receive KRW 20,00,00 of the compensation. As such, they are obligated to have residents of the damaged Dong enjoy damage caused by the construction without filing a civil petition against the Plaintiff’s construction work, so that they do not interfere with the Plaintiff’s construction work.
In other words, the Defendants, who are non-Subrogation members, are obligated to actively prepare a confirmation document that they actively allow the Plaintiff to work from Defendant B, who is not a non-Subrogation member, or actively prevent Defendant B from interfering with the construction by continuously filing a civil petition with the competent authority or using a banner against commercial building construction.
Nevertheless, the Defendants, a non-Subrogation member, failed to prevent Defendant B from performing their duties, such as filing civil petitions, and thus, the said Defendants’ obligations were omitted.
Therefore, the Plaintiff cancelled the instant agreement by serving a preparatory document on May 2, 2018, and thus, the Defendants, a non-Subrogation member, are obligated to refund to the Plaintiff compensation KRW 20,000,000, and damages for delay therefrom, paid by the Plaintiff due to the restitution following the cancellation of the instant agreement.
(2) The plaintiff asserts as above, but the defendant B also stated as the subject of the obligation to return the claim. (2)
Judgment
According to the statement of Gap evidence No. 1 (the agreement of this case), 20,000,000 won which non-Subrogation received from the plaintiff was divided due to the new construction of commercial buildings.