A. Of the Seo-gu Daejeon-gu Daejeon, the number of pages 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 of the annexed drawings shall be in order.

A. On October 11, 2006, the land was originally owned by the Plaintiff and F. The Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Daejeon (hereinafter “Seoul-dong”). The land was divided into a size of 526 square meters and a size of 743 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”) owned by the Plaintiff on the following grounds: (a) the land was divided into a size of 526 square meters and a size of 743 square meters (hereinafter “the land”).

After the division, 526 square meters prior to D was subdivided into 310 square meters on July 4, 2007 and 216 square meters prior to H.

B. At present, the Plaintiff’s land is surrounded by I, D, H, J, K, K, and L land, including C’s land owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”), and is not allowed to enter MM roads, N ditches, etc. without passing through the aforementioned surrounding land.

On the other hand, the D land after the division is adjacent to the NL which is a meritorious ditch.

[Ground of recognition] The description or shape of Gap evidence 1 to 9 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence 1 to 8 (including paper numbers), the result of each survey and appraisal, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff does not have a passage required for the use of the plaintiff's land between the plaintiff's land and M, which is a meritorious road, and therefore, the plaintiff's right to passage over surrounding land under Article 219 of the Civil Act is recognized as to the portion 7.3 square meters in the ship connecting each point of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 among the defendant's land, and the defendant shall not engage in any conduct interfering with this.

As to this, the defendant is unable to contribute to the division of the land before the division, so the right to passage over the surrounding land for the plaintiff's land is limited to D land after the division, which is the land of another divided person.

There has already been a separate passage leading to the plaintiff's land and public service.

For this reason, the plaintiff's right to passage over surrounding land under Article 219 of the Civil Act against the defendant's land is not recognized.

B. Whether the right to passage over surrounding land is recognized due to the division under Article 220 of the Civil Act is divided into the Plaintiff’s land and the D land after division.