1. As to the Plaintiff’s KRW 26,870,738 and its KRW 16,912,738 among them, the Defendant shall start on July 4, 2012.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of an aggregate building from the third to fourth above ground among the real estate listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and the above fourth floor is composed of 401, 402, and 403. The Defendant is the owner who acquired the above fifth and sixth floor from the above real estate through a voluntary auction on June 27, 2006. The Defendant is the owner who acquired the above fifth and sixth floor from the above real estate.

B. In light of the Defendant’s 206 remodelling construction work on the 5th and the 6th floor, and around 2009, water leakage occurred due to the damage to pipes owned by the Defendant. Accordingly, the Plaintiff was required to perform the construction work of strengthening and waterproofing the 4th floor water supply and electricity repair work of the 4th floor, the removal and installation work of the 4th floor, the removal and installation work of the ceiling, the wall gate removal and installation work, the interior cleaning work, etc. The construction cost is KRW 47,743,840, and the construction cost to be borne by the Defendant in consideration of the Defendant’s contribution to the construction cost is KRW 16,912,738 (a less than KRW).

C. Around March 2014, the Plaintiff generated additional water leakages after the interior works. The reason for the water leakage is that “In the event of a change in the location of pipes from the 5th floor bathing room to the 5th floor, the parts of the existing piping pipes have been processed insufficiently, and the existing pipes and broC pipe connections have been constructed insufficiently,” and the cost of the mastre repair work for which the Plaintiff suffered damages to the parts of the defective construction work is KRW 9,958,00.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including a branch number), appraiser D, and E's appraisal result, the result of the on-site inspection by this court

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the claim for damages caused by water leakage, the defendant did not fully take sufficient measures to prevent damage to the following floor when conducting artificial testing works, and neglected to exercise due care to prevent water leakage through the pipe part managed by the defendant, thereby causing the loss to the plaintiff.