A. The real estate listed in paragraph (6) of the attached list owned by the Plaintiff as indicated in paragraph (1) of the attached Table No. 1 among the land listed in paragraph (1) of the attached Table No. 1, the land indicated in paragraph (1) of the attached Table No. 2, (2), (8), (9), (1), (2) the part of (a) part of the ship connected with each of the above points, (2), (3), (7), (8), (2) the attached list No. 1 among the land listed in paragraph (2) of the attached Table No. 2, the land indicated in the attached Table No. 1, (2), (3), (7), (2) the part of the ship connected with each of the above points, and (3) the land indicated in the attached list No. 1, (4), (5), (7), and (4) the right of passage of surrounding land should be recognized.

Therefore, against Defendant B, who is the landowner listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 and 2, sought confirmation of the right to passage over surrounding land and the Plaintiff’s right to passage over surrounding land on the instant part, and seek confirmation of the right to passage over surrounding land on this part, and seek confirmation against Defendant C, D, E, F, and G, who is the landowner listed in the separate sheet No. 3.

In addition, Defendant B installed the same drawings in the land indicated in the attached list No. 3, 0.2m, height of 1.5m, reinforced concrete structure (Breast) with the length of 9.4m, and the land indicated in the attached list No. 6 inside the land indicated in the attached list No. 3, and the land indicated in the attached list No. 6, respectively, and installed concrete structure ( wall) with the thickness of 0.3m, height of 1.5m, length of 6.8m. connected. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s removal of this case’s portion(a), (b), and (c) as this interfered with passage of the part(c).

Attached Form

1. The <1> The <2> The <2> <2> the <2> the <2> the <2> the <2> the <2> the <2> the <2> the <2> the <2> the <2> the <2> the <2> the <2>