1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. From November 6, 1992, the Plaintiff owned and occupied the Guro-gu Seoul apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”) 208 Dong 201 (hereinafter “Plaintiff apartment”), and the Defendant owned and occupied the instant apartment (hereinafter “Defendant apartment”) located on the immediately upper floor of the Plaintiff apartment from February 25, 2005 to February 2005.

B. Around February 2005, water leakage occurred in the apartment house of the Plaintiff’s apartment, and the Defendant recognized that the cause of water leakage was attributable to the interior works of the Defendant’s apartment, and paid KRW 500,000 as compensation for damages to the Plaintiff.

C. At around 2010, the Plaintiff’s apartment kitchen water was generated in the ceiling, and the Defendant confirmed water leakages in the rubber pipe connecting the kitchen water pipe of the Defendant’s apartment house, and found that the water leakage of the lower floor occurred, thereby compensating the Defendant for the expenses incurred in running the kitchen water, and repair rubbering the kitchen water pipe connecting the kitchen water pipe.

On May 2013, water leakage occurred in the ceiling, etc. of the plaintiff apartment's apartment room, and the defendant confirmed that there was water leakage phenomenon in the rubber sprink part of the defendant apartment's hot water pipe, and accepted hot water pipe rubber sprinking to the defendant as compensation for the distribution cost.

E. On July 2013, the Plaintiff asserted that water has been recovered again in the ceiling, etc. of the Plaintiff’s apartment living room, and demanded the Defendant to pay and collect the cost of distribution. However, the Defendant refused the Plaintiff’s demand on the ground that, inasmuch as water leakage cannot be confirmed in the Defendant apartment, milch was made in a state where water was generated before, it was not the ground for the Plaintiff’s demand.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's apartment from around 2005, which the defendant started to reside in the defendant's apartment, due to the leakage of the part of exclusive ownership of the defendant's apartment.