1. The Defendant’s KRW 30,530,50 for the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from February 15, 2014 to May 17, 2016.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 30, 2010, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of a detached house of the second floor size on the ground of the Seocho-gu Seoul land (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s Housing”).

B. There was a multi-family house with the second floor size above ground on the land of Seocho-gu Seoul, Seocho-gu, and E, the land adjacent to the front of the Plaintiff’s house.

On August 1, 2013, the Defendant acquired the ownership of the above D, E, and above-ground buildings, and then newly constructed a house on the ground and a house on the two-story scale (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant’s house”) on the site, and completed the registration of initial ownership on April 14, 2014 after obtaining the approval for use on February 14, 2014.

C. Before the construction of the Defendant’s housing, two units of the above D and E’s second floor and the Plaintiff’s housing were located on the ground below the left part, and the Defendant’s housing and the Plaintiff’s housing were newly built and located on the lower part.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence 1 to 9 (including paper numbers) and images, appraiser F's appraisal result, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion caused a new construction of the Defendant’s housing, thereby infringing upon the right to sunlight and the right to mutual assistance, which had been previously enjoyed, beyond the tolerance limit.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 43,615,00 for the market price decline of the Plaintiff’s housing due to the infringement of the right of sunshine, and KRW 11,183,00 for the market price decline of the Plaintiff’s housing due to the infringement of the right of sunshine and KRW 54,798,00 for the total amount of KRW 11,183,00

3. Determination as to whether the right to enjoy sunshine is infringed

A. If the owner of one piece of land, etc. is deemed to have value as an objective living benefit, it can be legally protected if he/she is deemed that the sunshine benefit he/she had enjoyed from the previous one is worth as an objective living benefit. In other words, the number of sunlight generated by blocking the sunlight due to the construction of a new building or structure in the neighboring area, which is, the number of sunlight increases.