1. The Defendant’s KRW 3,00,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from November 11, 2011 to July 4, 2016.

1. From April 201, the Defendant: (a) removed the single-story housing located adjacent to the Plaintiff’s housing; and (b) newly constructed the third-story housing (hereinafter “instant housing”) on the ground; (c) in the process, there was no safety device or noise prevention measures; and (d) there was noise exceeding the permissible limit on the Plaintiff’s housing wall; and (c) there was no noise exceeding the permissible limit.

As a result, the plaintiff suffered property damage and mental damage caused by noise, etc. which paid a total of KRW 14.95 million as repair expenses.

In addition, on October 3, 2011, the Plaintiff was assaulted by the Defendant on at least three occasions on November 1, 201, and on November 11, 201 of the same month, and suffered injuries, such as brain salvine, salvine, salvine, right-hand salt, etc. In addition, the Plaintiff incurred property damage, which spent a total of KRW 10,478,501 from the medical expenses incurred therefrom.

In addition to the above compensation for property damage, the defendant sought the payment of consolation money of KRW 10 million due to assault against the plaintiff and mental damage caused by noise damage.

2. In full view of the purport of the whole arguments and Gap 1 to 5, 11, the following circumstances are recognized:

In other words, the Defendant was imposed an environmental fine of KRW 160,00 on the ground that the standard of living noise regulation was exceeded by the competent authority on November 7, 2011 in the course of constructing the instant house.

On the other hand, at around 20:00 on October 3, 201, the Plaintiff filed a criminal complaint against the Defendant on the ground that: (a) the Defendant used the Plaintiff’s outer arms to put the right shoulder, etc.; (b) on November 1, 201, he/she used the Plaintiff’s face as a elbow, and assaulted the Plaintiff’s face at one time on November 1, 201; (c) however, the Defendant was issued a non-prosecution disposition.

However, at around 14:00 on November 11, 201, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 500,000 on the ground of the fact that the Plaintiff and the horse dispute were punished at the construction site of the instant house and followed the Plaintiff’s right development by pushing ahead with the Plaintiff, etc. and followed the Plaintiff’s right development, etc.