1. The Defendants jointly do so to the rest of the Plaintiffs except Plaintiff D in the attached Table 4.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiffs are the parties. 1) The plaintiffs are the 15th apartment building E-dong in the Dong-gu, Gwangju Metropolitan City (hereinafter referred to as "Plaintiff apartment building").

Plaintiff

Apartment was completed on July 23, 1984

2) Of the 16 households, 16 households (hereinafter “Plaintiff 16 households of this case”).

(1) The term “transfer date” means a person who owns or owns a separate or joint ownership and acquired the ownership of each of the relevant housing units stated in the “transfer date” as “acquisition date of ownership” as “acquisition date of ownership” as “acquisition date of ownership,” and is residing there (However, Plaintiff G, H, and I did not transfer or reside in each of the relevant housing units after completing their transfer on the date indicated “transfer date” as “transfer date.”

2) Defendant A’s Housing Redevelopment and Rearrangement Project Association (hereinafter “Defendant A’s association”) is an executor of the new construction work of L Apartments located in J and K in Dong-gu in Gwangju-gu and K (hereinafter “Defendant apartment”).

Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”) and Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C”), and Defendant B and C together “Defendant Co., Ltd.” are the starting work of the new apartment construction project.

B. On November 7, 2014, the Defendant-Newly constructed apartment association obtained approval from the head of the Dong-gu Gwangju Metropolitan City for the implementation of the new apartment construction project.

around May 2016, Defendant Company commenced the Construction of New Apartments and completed the Construction of Aggregates on November 18, 2017, and completed the Construction of Aggregates on September 2018.

C. Prior to the construction of the current status of the plaintiff's apartment and the defendant's apartment, low-rise buildings around the plaintiff's apartment was scattered, and there was no building infringing on the sunshine of the plaintiff's apartment.

However, as a result of the new construction of the defendant apartment, the defendant apartment was located on the south side of the plaintiff apartment, and the narrow width between the two apartment buildings is 50.1m.

As a result of the entrustment of appraisal, there was a violation of the right to enjoy sunshine exceeding the tolerance limit on the plaintiff apartment due to the new construction of the defendant apartment.