1. The defendant, to the plaintiff A, KRW 5,642,40, KRW 1,139,200 for the plaintiff C, KRW 5,655,200 for the plaintiff E, and KRW 11,263 for the plaintiff F.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is an implementer who has obtained project approval with respect to a Ma apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”) with 5 underground floors and 3,885 households with 30 Dong-dong 30,000 above ground, which were newly constructed on the ground of 207,420.8 square meters of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government L.

B. The Plaintiffs are the owners of each house indicated in the “owned housing” column of the Plaintiff’s attached Table 2, located north of the instant apartment.

C. The Seoul Mapo-gu Ndong unit where the apartment of this case and the housing owned by the plaintiffs are located is classified as Class II general residential area under the National Land Planning and Utilization Act.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including provisional number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. As the plaintiffs' assertion of this case was newly constructed, a sunlight infringement exceeding the limit of admission to the housing owned by the plaintiffs occurred, and pressure increase has been increased due to the blocking of view.

Therefore, the Defendant, as the implementer of the new apartment construction project of this case, is obligated to pay each of the money stated in the “request amount” column of attached Table 3 attached hereto, including the market price decline and consolation money in the housing owned by the Plaintiffs, due to tort damages.

B. The existence of liability for damages (1) Whether the obstruction of sunshine exceeds the tolerance level under the generally accepted social norms shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances, including the degree of damage, the nature of the damaged interest and its social assessment, the use of the damaged building, the purpose of the land use, the regional characteristics, the prior relation to the land use, the possibility of preventing damage and avoiding damage, the violation of public law regulations and the progress of negotiations. New regulations on the right to sunlight newly established after the construction may also serve as meaningful data in the assessment of such illegality.

In addition, if there is a direct regulation on the blocking of sunshine in the related laws, such as the Building Act, it is the private law.