1. Defendant Won Construction Co., Ltd. shall be KRW 16,685,900 to Plaintiff A, and KRW 3,000,000 to Plaintiff B, respectively.

Based on the facts, Defendant Hanwon Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) is a person executing the instant construction work (hereinafter “instant construction work”) between the “D Corporation” from the “D Corporation at the Japanese Won-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and the Defendant Republic of Korea is the owner of the instant construction work.

The Defendant Company: (a) set the entire business period of the instant construction from December 23, 201 to November 30, 2015; (b) obtained permission from the chief of the Sejong Police Station to use explosives of 150,000 g and 50,000 detonating caps from November 26, 2012 to May 25, 201; (c) started blasting work (hereinafter “instant blasting work”).

Plaintiff

A is the owner of the E-ground Housing (hereinafter “instant Housing”) at Sejong-si, the neighboring area of the instant construction project, as shown below, and the Plaintiff B is the person who has resided in the instant housing.

[Reasons for Recognition] The summary of the plaintiffs' assertion in the purport of the whole arguments and arguments of Gap's evidence Nos. 1, Eul's evidence Nos. 3, 19, and 21-1 were generated due to the blasting construction of the defendant company.

In addition, the Defendant Company suffered noise in the course of performing the blasting construction of this case, which caused damage exceeding the limit of admission.

Therefore, the defendant company and the defendant Republic of Korea are jointly and severally liable to compensate the plaintiff A for damages equivalent to the repair cost, and the plaintiff B is jointly and severally liable to pay consolation money for mental distress.

The summary of the Defendants’ assertion is that, prior to December 5, 2012, there was no less than one blasting construction work in the instant case, and the cracks generated from the instant housing do not result from the blasting construction work in the instant case.

In addition, it cannot be said that the limit of admission has exceeded the limit of admission since the result of the blasting, noise and noise level inspection conducted in the Sejong City was within the standard level of noise.

As to the claim against the defendant company, the plaintiff A is liable for damages.