1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 13,260,800 to Plaintiff A; and (b) KRW 4,025,60 to Plaintiff B; and (c) to each of them, from January 4, 2019 to November 4, 2019.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 25, 2006, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to D Apartments and E (hereinafter “Defendant apartments”) in Ansan-si, Ansan-si.

B. On December 5, 2016, Plaintiff A purchased D apartment and F (hereinafter “Plaintiff apartment”) in Ansan-si, Ansan-si, 2016, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the 27th of the same month, and Plaintiff B, the wife, as well as Plaintiff B, was moved into the instant apartment, and also resides with his child.

C. On November 9, 2018, the water level of the Plaintiff’s apartment was accumulated into the Plaintiff’s apartment complex due to water leakages in the contact book of the main pipe that supplies heating distribution devices and hot water from the heating distribution devices, around the new wall, and around November 9, 2018, damaged the ceiling, walls, and furnitures of the Plaintiff’s apartment complex, such as the main room, living room, inner room, small room, etc.

As above, in repairing the damaged part of the water leakage caused by the plaintiff's apartment, KRW 15,392,00 is spent in total of KRW 27,144,00,00 as the restoration cost of the interior finishing water, and KRW 11,752,00,00 as the restoration cost of the household and other furnitures.

[Based on recognition] The descriptions and images of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 10, 11, 15, and 17 (including paper numbers), the inquiry results of this court's appraiser G, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. (1) In light of the above facts and evidence, we examine whether the water leakage part of the instant case belongs to the exclusive ownership, and the contact part of the main pipe, which supplies hot water from the heating distribution apparatus and the heating distribution apparatus, can be seen as the ground by having located within the Defendant apartment cream, and whether there is a defect in the location of the water leakage part of the instant case is not a method to confirm other than the residents of the Defendant apartment. In light of the fact that the Defendant apartment is a resident of the apartment, it is reasonable to view that the water leakage part of the instant case belongs to the Defendant’s exclusive ownership.

(2) Accordingly, the part of the instant case is included.