1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of a building with a 301 square meter (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”) and a building on the ground in Chungcheongnam-dong, Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, and the Defendant is the owner of a D-274 square meter (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”) and a building on the ground.

Plaintiff

Land and the defendant's land are located in the E market, and are adjacent to each other, such as the indication of the attached drawing.

B. The Plaintiff’s land adjoins FF roads and G roads, such as the indication of the attached drawing, to the Plaintiff’s land, and the part adjoining the Defendant’s land (e.g., the opposite part of the FF road) among the Plaintiff’s land is a vacant lot (hereinafter “instant vacant lot”).

C. There is a dispute between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the access to the instant vacant land via the Defendant’s land, and the Defendant installed obstacles, etc. on the Defendant’s land.

Accordingly, on December 7, 2017, the Plaintiff received a corrective order under Article 19-4(2) of the Parking Lot Act on the ground that an attached parking lot to the Plaintiff’s land-based building is not maintaining its original function, from the head of Young-dong, and received a disposition to impose a non-performance penalty on the ground that he/she failed to comply with the above corrective order from the head of Young-dong Gun on February 21, 2018.

The Defendant installed a wooden wall on the part on board (hereinafter “the part on dispute of this case”) that connects each point of the annexed drawing Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 among the Defendant’s land in sequence.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 17 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. Of the Plaintiff’s alleged land, the instant vacant lot is a place used as a parking lot for the Plaintiff’s land-based building, and in order to park on the instant empty lot, the part regarding the instant empty lot should pass through.

Therefore, the plaintiff has the right of passage over surrounding land to pass through the vacant land of this case, and the defendant is obligated to remove the facilities installed in the dispute of this case.

(b) judgment;