1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. The summary of the party’s assertion: (a) in May 1977, the Plaintiff purchased 125.6 square meters of the Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D, 125.6 square meters of its ground and apapap, and 19 square meters of the 19 square meters of the building (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land and building”), the Plaintiff installed a fence (hereinafter “the wall of this case”) on the boundary of the Plaintiff under an agreement with the owner of the adjacent Seoul Jongno-gu Seoul Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government land and building with a size of 162 square meters of its ground and 85.95 square meters of the 195 square meters of the 195 square meters of the land and building (hereinafter “Defendant’s land and building”), and (b) on its own, the Plaintiff

하더라도 민법 제239조에 의하면 “경계에 설치된 경계표, 담, 구거 등은 상린자의 공유로 추정”되는 것임에도, 피고가 2014. 3. 14. 피고 토지 및 건물을 취득한 후 같은 해 9월 초 원고의 동의 없이 이 사건 담장 중 별지 도면 표시 1, 2의 점을 연결한 부분의 담장을 훼손하였고, 그 위로 피고 건물 부분에 원고 토지 및 건물을 샅샅이 내려다 볼 수 있는 창문을 설치함으로써 원고의 사생활을 침해하고 있다고 주장하며, 피고를 상대로 주위적으로는 위와 같이 훼손된 담장 부분의 원상 복구를, 예비적으로는 그 원상 복구비 2,520,000원 및 담장의 훼손과 사생활 침해로 인하여 원고가 입은 정신적 고통에 대한 위자료 5,000,000원 이상 합계 7,520,000원의 지급을 구하고 있다.

As to this, the Defendant installed the fence of the Defendant’s building on the Defendant’s land located within the boundary part of the Plaintiff’s land by bearing the cost solely by the former owner, and on the Defendant’s land located within the boundary part of the Plaintiff’s land, which belongs to the Defendant’s personal ownership. However, the part of the fenced through the above window is mostly the roof part of the Plaintiff’s building, and part of the fenced is installed.