1. The part concerning the claim for appraisal costs in the instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Land No. 201 (hereinafter “Plaintiff Housing”) for the second floor No. 3, Seocho-gu, Seoul, and the Defendant is the owner of the same third floor No. 301 (hereinafter “Defendant Housing”).

B. From September 2013, wastewater leakageed from around the Defendant’s housing site due to the bathing room, floor drainage pipe rupture, and the destruction of waterproof layers of the Plaintiff’s housing (hereinafter “the instant water leakage”). Accordingly, around December 2013, the Plaintiff installed a facility for collecting wastewater away from the Defendant’s housing and discharging such wastewater out of the Defendant’s housing site, and the cost was KRW 1070,000,000,000.

C. In order to prevent water leakage in this case, reconstruction for the drainage pipes between the bathing room and the bathing room of the Defendant’s housing should be conducted, waterproof construction for the bathing room of the Defendant’s housing, and restoration work for the bathing room of the Plaintiff’s housing should be conducted.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions and images of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the results of appraisal, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. As to the claim for appraisal cost, the Plaintiff sought the payment of KRW 1.1 million out of the appraisal cost, but separate procedures are prepared for the payment of the cost of lawsuit, such as appraisal cost, so this part of the lawsuit is unlawful.

B. The owner of a building 1 can file a claim for the removal or prevention of damage on the ownership in a case where his living benefits are infringed due to nearby running water and such infringement goes beyond the generally accepted limit under the social norms. In light of these legal principles, the above facts of recognition is examined, and the plaintiff's living benefits are violated due to the water leakage of this case, which occurred due to the crack in drainage pipes of the defendant's house, beyond the generally accepted limit.

As such, the defendant is responsible for reconstruction of the drainage pipes between the bathing room and the bathing room of the defendant's house, and waterproof construction for the bathing room of the defendant's house, and the plaintiff.