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

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the D land and the building on the ground, and the Defendant is the owner of the C at Yangyang-si.

B. The Defendant installed a fence on the land C (hereinafter “the wall of this case”) at the time of smuggling.

2. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff installed the wall of this case in order to induce the plaintiff from bullying even though the defendant's 10 years prior to 10 years prior to 10 years prior to 20 years prior to 20 years prior to 20 years prior to 20 years prior to 20 years prior to 20 years

3. The written evidence evidence Nos. 1 and 4 alone does not recognize any benefit to the Defendant that the Defendant’s installation of the instant wall causes pain and damage to the Plaintiff, and there is no evidence to acknowledge the aforementioned circumstances otherwise. Rather, even if there is a wall of this case, there is no inconvenience for the Plaintiff to pass the instant wall on his own land, and therefore, the Plaintiff does not have the authority to demand removal with the Defendant having installed the instant wall of this case where its height does not reach the existing wall height.

4. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.