beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.06.28 2016나48911

주위통행권확인등 청구

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 31, 2008, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of 17m2, D, 957m2, and E, 961m2 (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned land”). The land owned by the Plaintiff is so-called so-called master land not adjacent to the road on the cadastral map from that time, and the Plaintiff is growing the Plaintiff in the above land.

B. On December 19, 2001, the Defendant determined and publicly announced that the water supply system, which is urban planning facilities, should be newly established at the Busan Northern District public notice HH in order to ensure the smooth supply of water to residents in the Busan FF andG regions.

C. On March 3, 2014, the Defendant acquired real estate located in B in North-gu, Busan, in accordance with the Act on the Acquisition of Land, etc. for Public Works and the Compensation Therefor, and changed the land category into a water supply site. On March 3, 2014, the Defendant combined the land category into 12,466 square meters (hereinafter “Defendant-owned land”).

On June 10, 2009, the defendant completed the construction of J-LLS and the reclamation of drainage pipes, etc. on the ground of the land owned by the defendant. At present, the defendant's vehicle and human resources necessary for the maintenance, repair, replacement, etc. of water pipes are passing through the drainage pipe supplying water from J-LLS to J-G-dong area, and the defendant's vehicle and human resources are being used as the passage of neighboring residents.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 9 (including paper numbers), Gap evidence Nos. 2-1 through 6, and the result of the fact inquiry, response, and the purport of the whole pleadings against the North Korean Head of Busan Metropolitan City of the first instance court.

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion is engaging in farming activities on the land owned by the Plaintiff, and the vehicle’s regular passage should be secured for banking work and construction of materials storage.

Of the land owned by the Defendant, the part on board (A) among the land owned by the Defendant is the only passage to the Plaintiff’s contribution from the land owned by the Plaintiff, but the Defendant is constantly passing.