A. 1) The Plaintiff purchased three (3) a total of 1720 square meters of money located on the land and its ground and completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 24, 2015 (hereinafter in sequence referred to as “instant land”) and “the instant money shed” and “the instant money shed”.

(2) The Defendant is the owner of salary-gun C previously 2106 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) that is adjacent to the west of the instant land.

B. A conflict between the Plaintiff and village residents was left alone for more than 10 years, but the Plaintiff planned to engage in the fish farming at the instant fish shed around March 2014. Around March 2014, J village residents, including the Defendant, had concerns over the decline in the community’s residential environment when raising pigs from the instant gold shed, and became in conflict with the Plaintiff. (ii) On June 5, 2014, the village residents installed a banner to oppose the installation of pigs located in the village, and on June 5, 2014, the Defendant sawd that the attached appraisal of the instant land, located as a passage route, was marked 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, and 19, with each point of “an area of 30 square meters inside the instant road (hereinafter “instant tree”).

3) Village residents laid the black land or set up foreign materials and concrete, etc. intermittently between the instant land and the public service, and put a letter on a red fluor in concrete further. C. The present status of the instant land and the instant land, the money sheds are located on the lower part of the wall, and the lower part is impossible to enter the land as a fluor, which is surrounded by mountain, without going through the instant land adjacent to the lower part.

2) From the 1970s to the time a dispute between the plaintiff and village residents arises, the land of this case is located on the road of this case (the road of this case is located among them).

(b).