1. The plaintiffs and the plaintiff Eul's successor's claims are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs and plaintiffs B-.

1. Basic facts

A. Plaintiff A is the owner of 785 square meters prior to JJ and 763 square meters of K forest (hereinafter all land is located in the Dong-dong, and thus, it is indicated only by the lot number; Plaintiff B is the land located in Dong-si); Plaintiff B is the owner of M forest land 673 square meters, N forest 1,004 square meters; Plaintiff C is the owner of 330 square meters prior toO; Plaintiff B is the owner of 1,001 square meters prior to P; Plaintiff B’s succeeding intervenor (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”), including Plaintiffs and Plaintiff B’s succeeding intervenors, owns Q forest 741 square meters owned by Plaintiff B at the auction on January 18, 2016.

B. The Defendant owns the instant land (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant land”) in total of the land owned by the Defendant, 132 square meters in H, 327 square meters in R, G road, 51 square meters in G road, and 104 square meters in G road.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. For the following reasons, the Plaintiffs are entitled to pass through the roads that occur due to the cause stated in the purport of the claim among the instant land (hereinafter “instant roads”), and even though the instant roads are the only passage up to the land owned by the Plaintiffs, the Defendant, around May 2012, installed a ridge, a simplified garage, a tree, or a steel gate (hereinafter “instant facilities”) on the instant roads and obstructed the passage of the Plaintiffs. As such, the Plaintiffs sought confirmation against the Defendant on the right to passage over surrounding land at the same time, and seek removal of the said facilities.

1) Since the instant road based on personal rights is a road provided for the passage of the general public, the Plaintiffs are entitled to pass along the instant road based on personal rights. (2) The Plaintiffs are entitled to pass over the surrounding land under Article 219 of the Civil Act regarding the instant road.

The plaintiffs also claim the exclusion of disturbance based on ownership, but the contents of ownership claimed by the plaintiffs are substantially the right to passage over surrounding land under Article 219 of the Civil Act.