1. The Defendant’s KRW 3,00,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual interest thereon from June 11, 2014 to May 7, 2015.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is residing in the house located in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City D (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s house”).

B. Around October 2013, the Defendant: (a) was building the existing house located in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, in which the Plaintiff’s house and the three-meter road were dried; and (b) newly building the first floor and the third floor house (hereinafter “Defendant’s house”).

C. The above area is a Class 2 general residential district, and both the Plaintiff’s housing and the Defendant’s housing are constructed toward the southwest.

On April 4, 2014, after completion of the completion inspection on the Defendant’s housing, the Defendant illegally covered the roof of the board with the third floor rail (4 square meters) and the rooftop (23 square meters) of the Defendant’s housing and extended it by installing showers.

(hereinafter referred to as “illegal extension”). E.

On August 29, 2014, the head of Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City imposed KRW 5,022,00 for enforcement fines on the illegal expansion of the third floor and rooftop of Defendant Housing.

[Reasons for Recognition: Evidence No. 1-11, Evidence No. 2-1 through 9, Evidence No. 1-2, Evidence No. 1, 3, and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination

A. (1) The plaintiff asserts that the right to enjoy sunshine is infringed due to the illegal expansion of the defendant's house. Thus, the defendant is obligated to remove the main claim.

(2) In a case where a landowner’s act of installing structures on his/her own land constitutes abuse of rights in relation to the owner of a neighboring building, and accordingly, the owner of a neighboring building may seek removal of the structures against the landowner by exercising the right to claim removal of interference based on the ownership of the building, if the use and profit-making of the neighboring building resulted in a substantial infringement.

In order to constitute the abuse of rights above, the exercise of rights is subjective to cause pains to the other party and to inflict damages on the other party, and there should be no benefit to the person who exercises the rights.