1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. Plaintiff A is the owner of a branch office No. 6 of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C Apartment Building (hereinafter “instant condominium building or commercial building”), which is the object of divided ownership, and Plaintiff B, its children, is the owner of each shop No. 8, 12, 13, 14, and 15 of the branch office No. 8, 12, 13, 15.

B. The defendant is a representative body of the sectional owners of the instant condominium building, including the plaintiffs.

(The practical system seems to be rarely active). (C)

The building of this case is an aggregate building which was completed on June 21, 1991 and approved for use.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the plaintiffs' assertion was that the defendant around B around B, 2008 built a building on the outer wall of the commercial building of this case, and due to the defects of the above construction, water leakage and flood damage occurred in each store owned by the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs paid KRW 300,000 to repair defects related to water leakage and flood damage around that time due to the above erroneous construction or negligence by the defendant. Nevertheless, the continuous occurrence of water leakage and flood damage, which led to the continuous lease of the stores owned by the plaintiffs for 12 months, causing damage to the total amount of KRW 14,40,000 (1.2 million for total monthly rent for stores owned by the plaintiffs x 12 months). Due to water leakage and flood phenomenon, the amount of monthly rent from the existing lessees for the above stores is KRW 24,00,000.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to compensate the plaintiffs for damages of 38.7 million won due to erroneous external wall lives (=3 million won).

B. In order to accept the Plaintiff’s request, the fact that the Defendant performed a construction project on the outer wall of the instant commercial building around A, 2008, and the fact that the Plaintiff’s request occurred in each shop owned by the Plaintiffs, first, the fact that water leakage, etc. is occurring.