(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.11.05 2019나103087

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.11.05 2019나103087

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The grounds for this court's acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows: the plaintiff's assertion of infringement on the view added by this court:

2. The reasoning for the first instance judgment, other than adding additional judgments, is the same as that for the first instance judgment, and such determination is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

2. The plaintiff asserts that he infringed the view and right to enjoy sunshine of the instant housing by constructing the apartment of 20 stories above the 6th unit of the Defendant E District Housing Association.

However, according to the whole purport of statement No. 1 and No. 7-1 through No. 7, each of the images and arguments, the instant house can be acknowledged as the fact that the apartment building constructed by the Defendant E-regional housing association as a single-story building in the north-west north-west is located on the right side at the time of considering and considering the fixed side of the instant house. On April 24, 2013, prior to the commencement of the apartment construction project by the Defendant E-area housing association, the satellite photo on April 24, 2013, which was located at least four stories in the front side of the instant house (NO. 9 and N. 10 out of the 9 pages of No. 1, No. 1, No. 9).

In light of the height and direction of the instant house and the location and height of the buildings located on the front and rear sides of the instant house as well as no data to verify the distance between the apartment constructed by the Defendant E-Regional Housing Association and the instant apartment house, it is insufficient to recognize that the infringement of the right to view or enjoy sunshine of the instant house has occurred due to the apartment constructed by the Defendant E-Regional Housing Association, even based on all the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

The plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

3. The judgment of the first instance court is justifiable, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2019.11.13 2018가단3329

-대전지방법원 서산지원 2018.05.09 2017가단4722

-서울행정법원 2019.06.21 2019구합1470

-대전지방법원 2019.11.05 2018나2743

-춘천지방법원 2014.11.18 2012가단13999