1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 12,109,359 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from April 30, 2017 to September 18, 2018; and (b) the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the land and the second floor building located in Nam-gu in Gwangju, Nam-gu (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff-owned building”), and the first floor of the above building has been sulped, and the Plaintiff is residing in the second floor of the building.

On the other hand, the above building was constructed in around 1981 and has been

9. Around 15th, approved for use.

B. On August 31, 2016, the Defendant obtained permission for the construction of a building on the fourth ground floor above the ground surface, which is the land adjacent to the building owned by the Plaintiff, from September 20, 2016 to April 30, 2017, and implemented the construction of the said building (hereinafter “instant construction”).

C. After the commencement of the instant construction work, the ground excavation work and soil mounds occurred on or around December 2016, among the construction works, from the wall, as well as the water leakage phenomenon of groundwater was generated on the wall, and at the time of performing the construction work of the ground excavation and soil mounds, the crack of the building owned by the Plaintiff was rapidly deepened and the ground subsidence was caused.

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 2, each of Eul evidence 4-1, Eul evidence 4-4, on-site inspection result of this court, the whole purport of the pleading

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. After the commencement of the instant construction work, the fact that soil breath has caused water leakage phenomenon on the wall on December 2016 during the construction work, and the fact that the cracks of the Plaintiff-owned building rapidly deepens and ground subsidences at the time of the construction work of the ground excavation and soil breathing construction work of the construction work of the instant construction work, as seen earlier, and the following circumstances acknowledged by the overall purport of each description of evidence No. 6, evidence No. 5-3, evidence No. 7, and evidence No. 8, and each photograph image of evidence No. 8, and the oral argument, namely, according to the investigation conducted before the construction of the instant construction work of the instant case, the excavation of the instant construction executed by the Defendant and the high groundwater level was higher, thereby spreading the risk of groundwater outflow, and it is confirmed that the water leakage and water leakage have deepened the ground.