주위토지통행권 확인의 소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is the owner who completed the registration of ownership transfer on November 16, 2017 with respect to the land of 2,350 square meters prior to Gyeonggi-gun B (hereinafter “the Plaintiff’s land”). The Defendant is the owner of C forest land of 1,39,240 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).
B. As a passage from the public road to the Plaintiff’s land, the part “1” (hereinafter “instant passage”) connected in sequence 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 of the instant land among the Defendant’s land was used. However, in 2018, the Plaintiff packaged concrete packaging on the instant passage.
C. The Plaintiff’s land is surrounded by other land, including the Defendant’s land, and is not adjoining to the road leading to a meritorious deed.
The passage of this case is the only passage from the Plaintiff’s land to the meritorious service.
On October 10, 2018, the Director of the D Research Institute sent a letter to the Plaintiff stating that the Plaintiff, who is the owner, shall submit his written opinion on the following, on the ground that the illegal possession was confirmed by the illegal use of the access road 4 meters wide and 40 meters long, but the actor is not specified.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 6, Eul evidence 1 (including additional number), the purport of whole pleadings
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion has cultivated crops while passing through the Plaintiff’s land by using the instant passage route, and has used the instant passage route as a farming road for transporting agricultural instruments or crops.
The Plaintiff’s land can not access the road without passing through the road of this case, and is the shortest distance that can access the road of this case to the road of this case on its topographical basis.
Therefore, the plaintiff has the right of passage over surrounding land as to the passage of this case.
In addition, the passage of this case is concrete from before the plaintiff acquired ownership.