1. The judgment of the first instance, including the Plaintiff’s claim changed or expanded in the trial, shall be modified as follows:

1. Basic facts

A. From July 28, 1993, the Plaintiff owned a building site of 533.5 square meters in Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s site”) and the Defendant owns the said D large 660.4 square meters (hereinafter “Defendant’s building site”) adjacent to the Plaintiff’s building site from February 22, 2002 to February 22, 2002.

B. Around May 200, the Plaintiff’s wife newly constructed a third floor building on the Plaintiff’s land (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s side building”) and completed the registration of initial ownership on May 2, 200. On December 2, 2002, the Defendant constructed a second and tenth floor building on the Defendant’s land (hereinafter “Defendant’s building”) and completed the registration of initial ownership on December 12, 2002.

C. Based on the Plaintiff’s site and the boundary line between the Defendant’s site, the land (including the dispute portion and the attached Table 2 appraisal map indicated 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 6; hereinafter “instant passage”) with the length of 2.5 meters in width and 28.4 meters in length included part (b) in a ship connected each other in sequence with the point of 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 6; hereinafter “instant passage”) was determined as a mixed-use passage on April 17, 1998 in accordance with the E-approval Publication of the Incheon Metropolitan City (Public Notice No. H of Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City) on March 22, 2010. On February 24, 2012, the instant lawsuit was re-determined as a mixed-use passage.

After the completion of the new construction of the Defendant building, the passage of this case was used only as a passage way for the Defendant’s building connected to the entrance of the underground parking lot of the Defendant’s building. Accordingly, in order to obstruct the Defendant’s use of the passage of this case, the Plaintiff installed a steel fence with a height of 1.2m in height and about 20m in length on the middle of 2.5m (the part corresponding to the Plaintiff’s site) of the passage of this case, the width of which is 5 meters, thereby causing disputes between the Plaintiff and the Defendant

E. Meanwhile, the defendant around December 12, 2002 concrete for the defendant's building underground in the part of the instant case (b).