A. On June 16, 2004, the Plaintiff acquired ownership of 2261/3253 square meters in Seo-gu Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”). As the Defendant’s mother died in around October 5, 2010, the Defendant acquired ownership of 166/8396 square meters in E- miscellaneous land owned by the network (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”) among 4320 square meters in size owned by the network (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”).

B. The location relationship between the Plaintiff’s land and the Defendant’s land is as shown in the attached Form.

C. The net D leased eight parcels of land, including Defendant’s land, to G, for the purpose of a construction machinery parking lot. However, on April 25, 2013, the heir of the network D, including the Defendant, leased the said land to G for the same purpose.

However, the land on the part of the Plaintiff is currently being used as a road, which was a past bank, and the boundary between the portion not used as a road and the part on the part on the part of the Defendant is not clear. As the part on the part on the part on the part on the part on the part on the part on the part on the Plaintiff, among the annexed drawings, G has occupied and used the part on the part on the part on the part on the part on the part of the

E. In addition, G is passing through a part of the Plaintiff’s land (a yellow part of the Plaintiff’s land on the side indicated in the attached Form drawing) in order to move to a meritorious road (on the top part of the upper part of the attached Form drawing) in operating construction machinery, etc. parked on the Defendant’s land.

Although the defendant alleged that he did not operate the land on the part of the plaintiff, it is the way that the defendant would not use the land on the part of the plaintiff without passing through the plaintiff's land on the part of the defendant, but should return to a considerable distance, and all of the images and arguments of evidence A No. 6-1 through No. 8.