All
| TITLE | 【Syllabus of Latest Opinion】Supreme Court Decision 2016Da33202, 33219 Decided June 3, 2021 【Damages (Etc.); Damages (Etc.)】 [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
|
【Main Issues and Holdings】 [1] The requirements to demand compensation for damages on the grounds that as a building, etc., whose external walls are made of glass, were constructed on the adjoining land, the excessive reflected sunlight has occurred, and, as such reflected sunlight flows into the adjoining residential areas, the residents therein have endured pains such as obstruction of their view, etc. as a result of the inflow thereof, and, in such a case, the standard of determining whether the extent to which the inflow of reflected sunlight disturbs their daily lives exceeds the tolerable limit by social notions [2] When determining the reasonableness of a claim for prohibition of the disturbance seeking the prevention or removal of the reflected sunlight due to the disturbance in daily life caused by the inflow of reflected sunlight, whether the benefits that the party, making such claim, may gain and the disadvantages that the other party and the third party may face by allowing such claim should be compared and balanced (affirmative) [3] In a case where Party B and others, dwelling in the adjoining apartment, demanded compensation for damages and prohibition of the disturbance against Stock Company A, which constructed and is using a building with the entire outer wall made of glass, arguing that, as the reflected sunlight created by the medium of the glass of the outer wall of the above building flows into the residential areas, the disturbance in their daily lives resulting therefrom has gone beyond the tolerable limit, the case holding that there were errors of misapprehension of the legal principles in the judgment of the lower court, which viewed that the disturbance in their daily lives arising from the reflected sunlight did not go beyond the tolerable limit by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations thereon even though how brightly and how long the reflected sunlight should flow into the main living space such as living room or master bedroom of the apartment to cause visual impairment such as glare, etc. and whether the disturbance in everyday life exceeding the acceptable limit is caused as the residential function of the apartment due to the reflected sunlight is harmed should have been directly considered |
|
