The plaintiff succeeding intervenor's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the intervenor succeeding to the plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning for this part of the reasoning is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination of removal of waterway pipes and request for the delivery of land

A. According to the finding of facts as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant maintained and managed the waterway and occupied the instant land, which is the site.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Plaintiff’s Intervenor is obligated to remove the waterway and deliver the instant land to the Intervenor.

B. The summary of the Defendant’s argument regarding the Defendant’s assertion 1) was that the Defendant, who was the owner of the land prior to the instant subdivision, set up the instant waterway on the land prior to the instant subdivision with reasonable compensation and with the permission of the use of the land from those owners.

In addition, pursuant to Article 173 of the former Agricultural Community Modernization Promotion Act, the plaintiff succeeding intervenor, who is the successor to the land before the division, succeeded to the rights of the previous owner.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor cannot request the Defendant to remove the instant waterway and deliver the instant land.

B) Article 173 of the former Agricultural Community Modernization Promotion Act (amended by Act No. 2199, Jan. 12, 1970; Act No. 4823, Dec. 22, 1994; Act No. 4823, Dec. 22, 1994) provides that “The rights and obligations of a person who has ownership or other rights to the land within the farmland improvement project and the farmland improvement project shall be transferred to his/her successor simultaneously with the transfer of ownership or other rights to the land.” Here, the term “the rights and obligations concerning the said project” refers to the obligation to have the rights and obligations to the said project itself, such as the entry into and use of the land for the implementation of the farmland improvement project and the installation of facilities (see Supreme Court Decision 96Da43607, Feb. 25, 1997). Meanwhile, the said Act provides that the land located within the project execution area