1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. From June 24, 1991, the Plaintiff is the owner of the C Forest in South-Namnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do.

B. In 2017, the Korea Housing Construction Corporation started on the D Miscellaneous land adjacent to the said forests and fields.

The defendant is the owner and the contractor of the above construction work.

On the other hand, the defendant concluded a construction contract with E as the contractor for the above construction work.

C. E was also the field manager of the above construction, and is subject to criminal punishment for the diversion of part of the above forest land among the above construction works, alteration of the form and quality of land in the above forest land, and reclamation of construction waste in the above forest land.

[Reasons for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 4-3, 4-15, 5-43, 6-22, 6-32 and 7; the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The plaintiff's assertion is the owner of the above construction project and the contractor, and the part of the above forest was damaged, the boundary mark was destroyed, removed, and the trees planted in the above forest area were cut down without permission.

5,126,760 won for the restoration of the forests damaged by the defendant, 33,873,240 won for the value and planting expenses of the trees that the defendant saw, and 41,00,000 won for the restoration expenses, including other expenses.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 41,00,000 as damages for tort and statutory damages for delay stated in the purport of the claim.

Even if the Defendant is not directly liable for tort, the Defendant is liable for damages due to the failure to perform the management and supervision obligation for E.

3. In light of the current status, estimated damage amount, restoration status, etc. of the above forest land acknowledged by the evidence No. 5-16, 23, 24, 26, Gap evidence No. 11, and the fact inquiry conducted on November 29, 2018 by the South Navy, etc., it is recognized that there was damage to the extent that the cost of restoration as alleged by the plaintiff was required, damage to the boundary mark, and tree trees in the above forest land.