1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

purport.

1. The part used by citing the judgment of the court of first instance

A. Of the judgment of the first instance, the fourth 8-10 vehicles in the fourth 8-10 vehicles in the judgment of the first instance: “(i) The Plaintiff is unable to submit the noise level measurement data that occurred during the construction period of the instant apartment in addition to the noise level measured on March 28, 2018 and March 29, 2018; ② although the Defendant Company has exceeded the living noise control standards on two occasions, the Plaintiff is and the Plaintiff on March 28, 2018.”

3. From July 14, 2015 to May 20, 2017, in addition to the result of the noise level measurement conducted by the 29th 29th 29th 2015, there were “B details of civil petitions related to the redevelopment and the data on the measurement of noise” in the evidence “B” in the evidence No. 27, stating the result of measurement exceeding 65dB, which is the standard for the regulation of living noise, on six occasions between July 14, 2015 and May 20, 2017 (one day after the completion of the construction project of the instant apartment), but the said evidence also contains the result of measurement conducted on November 6, 2018; however, it is nine times if the noise level at the construction site of the instant apartment is measured within the standard for the regulation of living noise, and ② if the Defendant Company causes noise exceeding the standard for the regulation of living noise during the four-year period of the new construction project of the instant apartment, it is confirmed several times”

B. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part of the fifth 8 and nine types of “the Plaintiff’s building goes about about 14 years from the time when the approval for use was obtained on June 11, 2004.” The Plaintiff obtained the approval for use on the Plaintiff’s building on June 11, 2004, and the time when the construction of the instant apartment was completed on or around March 2018, the Plaintiff’s building goes beyond 14 years after the elapse of 14 years before the completion of the construction work of the instant apartment.” The reasons for this case are as follows. The part requiring revision and the part requiring revision in accordance with additional evidence among the judgment of the court of first instance, which are written as follows, and the Plaintiff specifically emphasized as the grounds for appeal by this court.