1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 11, 2011, the Plaintiffs purchased 4,111m2 (hereinafter “instant land”) from P as a co-ownership and completed the registration of ownership transfer on November 22, 201 of the same year after purchasing 4,11m2 (hereinafter “instant land”).

(Plaintiff A Saemaul Association, J shall be 6/25, Plaintiff B shall be 3/25, Plaintiff C shall be 2/25, and the remaining Plaintiffs shall be 1/25, respectively).

Around October 2007, the Defendant started construction of a new inspection on the ground of Q, R, S, and T Forest Land (hereinafter “instant inspection”) on or around April 2012, and completed construction on or before the date of the instant inspection. The Defendant is occupying and using a part of 303 square meters in the text “b” (hereinafter “b”) on the instant land as an access road to the instant inspection.

[Reasons for Recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 21, the result of the on-site inspection by this court, the result of the appraiser U's survey and appraisal, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the fact that the defendant's land delivery duty is acknowledged, the defendant occupies and uses the part of "b" among the land in this case owned by the plaintiffs as access roads. Thus, the defendant is obligated to deliver the part of "b" to the plaintiffs, except in extenuating circumstances.

B. As to the Defendant’s assertion on the waiver of exclusive use right 1, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff’s claim is without merit, since the Defendant obtained consent from the former owner of the instant land to use the land for the purpose of road use, and the Plaintiffs acquired ownership by purchasing the instant land from the P with knowledge of such circumstances, the Plaintiffs, who were specifically succeeded from the P who waived the exclusive use right, cannot exercise exclusive use right as to the portion of “bb”.

In full view of the whole arguments, Gap evidence No. 5-1, No. 5-2, Eul evidence No. 1-3, Eul evidence No. 2-1, No. 2, Eul evidence No. 14, and the whole purport of the pleadings, the defendant is to establish access roads to temples on January 4, 2007.