1. As to the Defendant’s ground of appeal

(a) In a case where a private land is naturally occurring or is classified into a proposed road site and actually used as a road for the traffic of the general public, if the owner of the land grants a neighboring resident or the general public the right to free access to the land by providing the land as a road, or if the land is interpreted as giving a waiver of exclusive and exclusive rights to use and benefit from the land, it shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances such as the circumstance and period he owns the land, the reason and scale of the divided sale of the remaining land, the location and nature of the land to be used as the road, the relation with the neighboring land, the surrounding environment, etc., and the degree of contribution to the land for the effective use and benefit of the remaining land partitioned and sold.

(See Supreme Court Decision 88Meu1697 Decided July 11, 1989, and Supreme Court Decision 2010Da47681 Decided November 25, 2010, etc.) B.

As to the Defendant’s defense that the Plaintiff renounced the exclusive right to use and benefit from the land indicated in the attached Form 543 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) among the land size 1,005 square meters in Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si., the lower court: (a) purchased the said land and D and E on April 1, 198, after the lapse of one month, on which the Plaintiff purchased the said land on February 23, 198, and purchased the said land on April 1, 198, which was 3,668 square meters (hereinafter “the land before the instant subdivision”); and (b) on July 21, 1988, on which three months have passed since the said land was divided into 25 square meters as indicated in the attached Form 1 of the lower court’s “division drawing”; and (c) the Plaintiff played a role as the passage of the said land on July 25, 198, including the land indicated in the attached Form 930 square meters (hereinafter “the instant land”).