A. Of the 1,605 square meters prior to Jinju-si, attached appraisal marks 24, 25, 26, 9, 27, 28, 29, 30, 24.

The Plaintiff is the owner of 1,524 square meters prior to Jinju-si (hereinafter “instant land”), and the Defendant is the owner of 1,605 square meters prior to Jinju-si (hereinafter “Defendant-owned land”).

Of the land owned by the defendant, the defendant set up a wire network in this part of the attached Form 9,27.

[Ground of recognition] In order to enter the land of this case owned by the Plaintiff as a result of no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including a provisional number), the purport of the entire pleadings, and the purport of the argument of the parties to the lawsuit, it is necessary to follow the part of "b" inside line of land owned by the Defendant, in the order of each point of indication No. 24, 25, 26, 9, 27, 28, 29, 30, and 24 among the land owned by the Defendant.

(hereinafter “the instant part”). However, the Defendant interfered with the Plaintiff’s passage by using wire-nets in the said part, including the two parts.

The Defendant’s right to passage over the surrounding land owned by the Defendant is not recognized, since it is long as it does not enter the two parts of the instant case but is a forest road and can contribute to a road through another person’s land.

Judgment

If a piece of land has no access to a public road, which is necessary for the use of the land, without passing over the surrounding land, and the owner of the land cannot reach the public road, or the cost to reach the pubic road is excessive, he may pass over the surrounding land to the public road, and if necessary he may construct a path.

However, such place and method must be selected as the place and method with the lowest damage.

(Article 219 of the Civil Act) The above evidence and the result of the on-site inspection conducted by the court, and the purport of the entire pleadings as a result of the survey appraisal, can immediately be deemed to have been credited to the land in this case, on the other hand, if the land owned by the defendant was owned by the defendant, while the land in this case can immediately be contributed to the original state, and it seems that there

However, the Defendant uses the part of the instant case to the Plaintiff.