주위토지통행권확인 청구의 소
1. All of the instant lawsuits are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The Plaintiff’s assertion is seeking confirmation of the right of passage on each of the above lands to Defendant Dak Co., Ltd., the owner of each of the roads listed in the separate sheet No. 1 through No. 4, which are the roads leading to the Suwon-si flood Zone C forest and D forest (hereinafter “each of the instant forests”) owned by the Plaintiff, and to Defendant Scup, Scup Co., Ltd., the owner of each of the above lands, and the owner of each of the said lands, and seek confirmation of the right of passage on each of the above lands from among the roads listed in the separate sheet No. 5, which are other roads leading to each of the instant forests and fields. The Plaintiff’s assertion
2. Determination
A. The right of passage over surrounding land, stipulated in Article 219 of the Civil Act, is a right based on the adjustment of mutual use of adjacent land, and recognized as a right of use over surrounding land to the owner or superficies of the land and a person having chonsegwon
B. (See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da22767, May 8, 2008).
In light of the above legal principles, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership with respect to H on May 21, 2015, when comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership with respect to H on May 21, 2015, and completed the registration of transfer of ownership with respect to Kansi-si Forest Land C among the forest of this case to H on April 16, 2013 among the forest of this case.
According to the above facts, the plaintiff can be found to be the owner of each forest of this case, and there is no other evidence to prove that the plaintiff is the owner of each forest of this case.
Therefore, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit in this case is unlawful since there is no benefit to seek confirmation on each road listed in the separate sheet 1 through 4, which is a road leading to each forest of this case, or on each road listed in the separate sheet 5.
3. As such, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit of this case is unlawful and thus, it is dismissed in entirety.