1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The land owned by the Plaintiff clan in Young-gu, Suwon-si C, Suwon-si, 540m2 (hereinafter “instant land”).

The land of this case was originally 1,454m2 (the plaintiff clan was owned from January 16, 193) and 914m2 of the land was divided into D around May 22, 2006, and it remains after the registration of ownership transfer to the sports local public corporation by consultation on the land for public use on August 7, 2006.

B. The plaintiff clan owned the land in this case, including the land in this case. However, due to the implementation of the E Housing Site Development Project (Designation and Public Notice around June 2004), one ton truck, agricultural track, etc. were allowed to enter the land in this case from the public service to the land in this case before the land in this case was expropriated and the construction work was performed. The plaintiff clan used the land in this case.

C. However, as the above land becomes expropriated or acquired through consultation for public land due to the implementation of the housing site development project, only the land in this case remains in land outside the above housing site development project zone.

The plaintiff is doing dry field farmers in the land of this case, but there is no access road to which vehicles, such as one ton truck, etc., can enter the land of this case due to the implementation of the said E housing site development project. Accordingly, the plaintiff sets up a farming house in the above land for several years without passing a vehicle or track.

[Evidence: Gap 1 to 7 (including paper numbers), the whole purport of oral argument]

2. Assertion and determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is the clan of the Plaintiff’s clan, and the Plaintiff’s clan entered the Plaintiff’s land, including this case’s land, by using one ton truck and agricultural track, etc. as the access to the Plaintiff’s land was made before the implementation of the instant housing site development project. However, the Plaintiff’s land, other than the instant land, was expropriated or obtained through consultation on public land, and the front part of the instant land is a park and apartment.