1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The Defendant is on the Plaintiff, and on the ground of 133 square meters and 36 square meters in Gyeongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do.

1. Basic facts

A. The Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) is the former owner of the land and the building portion listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as the “mixed”), and is engaged in resort condominium business, etc. In addition to the aforementioned land and the building parts, the Plaintiff used the land and the road and the parking lot on the direction of the entrance of the instant container (hereinafter referred to as the “instant land,” both of which consist of the two lots) adjacent to the Plaintiff, and used the land of 133 square meters and D large 36 square meters (hereinafter referred to as the “instant land”).

B. On August 10, 2006, F, who was an in-house director of E, completed the registration of ownership transfer for reasons of sale on February 12, 1990 in its own name, and completed the registration of ownership transfer for reasons of sale on August 10, 2006, one of its own children on August 10, 2006.

C. On June 9, 2011, the Plaintiff purchased most of the shares (the entire portion of the building, and the land portion) of the instant containers owned by E in the auction procedure for H real estate rental with the Changwon District Court J. H real estate branch, and operated the instant containers until now.

Since July 201, the Plaintiff purchased the instant container, the Defendant installed steel structure, such as steel pipe, etc. (hereinafter “the instant steel structure”) and block structure on the boundary of the instant land, but around February 2014, the height of the instant steel structure was lowered by the first half of the steel structure.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap evidence 3, 5, 6, and 8 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the result of the on-site inspection by the court of the trial before remand, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Plaintiff 1’s primary assertion ① Since E, who was the former owner of the instant containers, held a servitude for the passage of the instant land, the Plaintiff who purchased the instant containers through an auction under the Civil Execution Act.