The instant lawsuit is dismissed.

Costs of lawsuit shall be borne individually by each person.

1. The Plaintiff is the owner of each land and building C in Seopopopoposi C, B, and D in Seopopoposi.

The Plaintiff, while residing in the above building, caused inconvenience to the daily life due to the old water supply pipes, installed water supply pipes in Seopo City C and B.

G operating “Fpenture” in Seopo City E imposed excessive water rate on water supply pipes in July 2017, and requested the Defendant to relocate the water supply pipes via B’s land in Seopo City. However, the Defendant rejected G’s request on the ground that the Plaintiff, the landowner of Seopo City B did not consent.

Accordingly, G filed an administrative appeal with the Claimant (G) to the effect that the Appellee (Defendant) applied for the Jeju Special Self-Governing Province Administrative Appeals Commission for an administrative appeal to the effect that the Claimant will implement the construction works laid underground as water pipes through B in Seopopo City B, and the Jeju Special Self-Governing Province Administrative Appeals Commission accepted the G’s claim on February 28, 2019 and rendered

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant adjudication”): The respondent (the defendant) shall perform the construction work as a water pipe via the land B when he returns to the claimant (G).

The reason (exploration): In this case, the manager of the water supply facilities seems to be the waterworks business operator.

(m) The Ordinance on the Water Supply of Jeju Special Self-Governing Province provides for the application of interested parties to the water supply pipes included in the water supply facilities and the construction of the Do Governor's authority, so the applicant's right to request compensation for performance as the water supply pipes is recognized

(A) The Supreme Court Decision 2015Da247325 Decided December 15, 2016 ruled that “it is not necessary to obtain the consent or consent of the land owner who passes through the water supply system, etc. to perform construction works based on the right to use the water supply system, etc. under Article 218(1) of the Civil Act.” Thus, the respondent’s assertion that the request of the claimant cannot be accepted is reasonable because it did not obtain the consent of the neighboring land owner.