1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of a house with 25.36 cubic meters and 0.83 square meters in store 0.83 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned building”). The Defendant is the owner of a building with a 25.36 cubic meters and mentment block block lub roof, one story of the building owned by the Plaintiff”). The Defendant is the owner of the building with a 221.62 square meters and a mentmen’s store with a single floor of the steel bars located in Daegu-gu Northern-gu D, Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, 21.62 square meters and annexed buildings, and 4.17 square meters in storage with a single floor of the mentmen’s branch of the roof (hereinafter “the

B. On March 28, 2014, the Defendant entered into a contract with F that operates the “E” and the Defendant-owned building for the construction of roof improvement, wall replacement, etc. (hereinafter “instant construction”). Accordingly, F performed the instant construction work from time to time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that vibration generated by the use of construction machinery during the construction process of the instant construction project causes ruptures in the ceiling, walls, floors and water supply, facilities, windows, shoess, and kitchen facilities owned by the Plaintiff, or damages the said facilities. The Plaintiff suffered damages of KRW 47 million for repairing the said facilities.

In addition, due to the occurrence of vibration, noise and collapse of neighboring housing caused by the construction of the instant case, there was considerable mental suffering due to unstable and severe stress.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff a solatium of KRW 47 million and a solatium of KRW 5 million for mental and physical damages, and the damages for delay.

B. In light of the following circumstances, each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 12, Eul evidence Nos. 3, 5, 6, 8, and 9 and the overall purport of the film and pleading in the judgment of the court of first instance as to the claim for damages against property 1, and each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 16 through 19 is considered.