1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The Defendants jointly share the Plaintiff KRW 48,498,896 and 44.

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) set up a hacker’s land adjoining to the above land on December 2, 2015, on the ground that the construction of a row house on the F land owned by E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) around the boundary of H land owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and removed hackers using a hacker with a height of approximately 1 to 2 meters, and approximately 50 meters in length, which was set up at the boundary of H land adjoining the above land (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”). On March 28, 2016, the hacker Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd”) set up a total of 92 hack tree trees owned by the Plaintiff, which were planted on the Plaintiff’s land

B. Defendant B is the representative director of the Defendant Company, and the above.

In the facts charged as stated in paragraph (1), the indictment was instituted ( Jeju District Court 2016 High Court 2016 High Court 1852), and on November 11, 2016, the above charges were all convicted by the above court and the above judgment was finalized by a two-year suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months due to boundary intrusion and property damage.

C. Meanwhile, in the Plaintiff’s land, the Plaintiff entered wruscis wruscis and Defendant B deposited KRW 10,000,000 with the Plaintiff as the deposited person on October 24, 2016 in the above criminal procedure.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, 6, and 8 (including paper numbers), the result of on-site inspection conducted by the court of first instance, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Defendant B, the representative director of Defendant B, who is the Plaintiff’s assertion, arbitrarily removed the cho trees owned by the Plaintiff, thereby resulting in the Plaintiff’s active damage equivalent to KRW 96,600,950 of the cost of restoring cho trees and the mental damage equivalent to KRW 10,000 of the solatium amounting to KRW 10,000,00. Meanwhile, Defendant B deposited KRW 10,000 to the Plaintiff in relation to the said damage. Defendant B, as a tort, deposited KRW 96,60,950 as an employer of Defendant B pursuant to Article 756 of the Civil Act (i.e., positive damage: KRW 96,60,950, KRW 10,000, KRW 10,000 of the deposit money).