Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the amount ordered to be paid below shall be revoked and revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a resident or owner of Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C Apartment D (hereinafter “instant apartment”) E (hereinafter “Plaintiff apartment”) and the Defendant is a resident or owner of the instant apartment F (hereinafter “Defendant apartment”).

B. From March 20, 2019, water flows out from the wall of the Plaintiff’s apartment apartment living room, and the Defendant requested for the detection of water leakage to the interior fishermen G around March 30, 2019.

G on April 1, 2019, found water leakage points from the floor on the side of the entrance room of the defendant apartment building and repaired them.

(C) Even after the first repair, the number of the Plaintiff’s apartment units was continued, and the Defendant requested G to detect water leakage around April 5, 2019. G around April 8, 2019, after visiting the Plaintiff’s apartment units, confirmed that water flows into the ceiling of the living room, the wall, and the inner wall, and discovered and repair the boiler pipes of the Defendant’s living room floor at that time (hereinafter “second repair”).

After the second repair, the plaintiff's apartment building did not have any leakage phenomenon any longer.

Although the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to reimburse expenses incurred in the course of water leakage on several occasions, the Defendant took the position that “The Defendant will only pay part of the cost incurred in the course because the degree of the wall surface and the wall 2nd (5 cm, 20 cm) under the wall surface (5 cm and 2 cm) under the direction of the ward on the right side of the ward.”

Accordingly, on May 7, 2019, the Plaintiff displayed three pages of the inner wall wall, and sold 1.130,000 won to the ward and the main room.

E. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff accepted the entire apartment around 2004, and thereafter resided in the above apartment since that time.

At the time of around 2012, the plaintiff's apartment construction governance and water flows into the main bank of the plaintiff's apartment building, and the plaintiff newly saw the entire main part of the main bank.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsurged Facts A, Gap Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9.