통행방해금지등청구
1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On December 12, 2014, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on D forest land 3,174 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned forest”).
B. On August 11, 2016, the Defendant completed each registration of transfer of ownership with respect to the E-mail 1,365 square meters adjacent to the said forest (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”) and the said F-road 159 square meters. < Amended by Act No. 1483, Jul. 28, 2017; Act No. 14855, Jul. 28, 2017>
C. Meanwhile, the land of this case, which is divided into the said H river, is the land owned by the Republic of Korea, which is divided into the land of this case, Namyang-si, Namyang-si.
【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 10 (including virtual numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The former owner of the land owned by the Defendant (the former owner of the land owned by the Defendant) opened and passed a road on the instant land while building the housing on the said land. The former owner of the forest owned by the Plaintiff and village residents entered the said forest through the instant land. 2) After purchasing the said forest, the Plaintiff, after passing through the instant land, has cultivated the vegetables, capital reduction, etc. in the said forest.
3) However, after the Defendant purchased the land owned by the Defendant at a late time, the Plaintiff interfered with the Plaintiff’s passage by reclaiming and piling up stone at a height of 50 meters and 7 meters in width on the instant land without permission. Accordingly, the Plaintiff seek a judgment, such as the purport of the claim, based on the Defendant’s right to claim for the exclusion of interference with passage against the Defendant, who is a victim interfering with the passage by the Defendant.
B. 1) First of all, there is no evidence to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s entry of evidence Nos. 9 and 10 on the land of this case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. 2) Next, whether the Defendant’s reclamation of earth and sand of this case and piling up a stone shed, thereby hindering the Plaintiff’s passage.