통행방해금지 등
1. The Defendant is the Plaintiff’s “1” in the attached Form 1 No. 7, 8, 9, and 10 square meters among the land size of 56 square meters and D 694 square meters prior to C.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On May 18, 2012, the Plaintiff was awarded each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”) on May 18, 2012 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on June 29, 2012 by winning a successful bid in the auction E auction case for Jung-Eup branch of Jungju District Court, and the Defendant owns C and D land (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”).
B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant’s land were owned by F, both of which were originally owned by the Defendant, and F opened the part (B) of the attached drawing Nos. 1, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 7 among the Defendant’s land, which connects each point of the Defendant’s land in sequence, as a passage, and operated a stable (50 cattle breeding) and orchard from the Plaintiff’s land.
C. F installed iron bars on the part (A) of the Defendant’s land, which connects each point of No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, No. 4, No. 5, No. 6, No. 1, No. 1, No. 2, No. 4, No. 5, No.
After that, even though the Plaintiff removed it, on April 2013, the Defendant again installed a steel door at the same place, and the Defendant obstructed the Plaintiff’s passage on the land by using the instant road in a way that the said steel door is closed.
Plaintiff
There are four kinds of paths as shown in the attached Form 2 for access to land to a public road.
The passage of this case is the passage of this case, and the passage of this case is the passage above the bank, and the passage of this case is impossible as the passage above the bank, and it is not easy to pass.
The passage of 3 is a passage from the shores to the shore, which is possible to enter one ton truck, but its length is longer than the passage of 1, and some sections of the passage are used as farmland.
The 4th passage remains as dry field from 10 to 20 meters under the bank, and there is no passage.
E. Although the Plaintiff’s husband filed a criminal complaint against the Defendant as a result of the general traffic obstruction (a general traffic obstruction with Ansan District Court Decision 2013 High Court Order 2013 High Court Order 1231), “The Plaintiff and the Defendant et al. along the instant traffic route.”