1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. In the process of constructing a detached house on the ground of 660 square meters prior to Seosan-si, the Plaintiff became necessary to obtain a building permit and access road from the above site to the road.

C Forest land 29,767 square meters owned by the Defendant includes a part between the above site and the road.

B. On December 13, 2013, the Defendant: (a) prepared and provided a written consent to land use with respect to 40 square meters necessary for the Plaintiff to secure access roads to detached houses newly built by the Plaintiff among forest C (hereinafter “instant land”); and (b) received KRW 5 million from the Plaintiff.

C. The Plaintiff obtained a construction permit and applied for a completion permit, and the competent authority responded to the effect that the part 32 square meters per page of the annexed drawing indicating the access road in C forest should be changed from “forest” to “road” to “road” in order to undergo a completion inspection.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry in Gap 1 through 8, 10]

2. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively considering the evidence as mentioned earlier and the purport of each statement in Gap 9 (including the provisional number), include the following circumstances, namely, ① the land use consent form: (a) the land use consent form and use of road for the construction of a new house (to secure access roads); and (b) the land of this case, with the certificate of personal seal impression attached when applying for authorization for new construction of a new house, to the plaintiff and Eul; and (c) this merely appears to mean that the plaintiff and the defendant allow the use of the land as access roads; and (b) the plaintiff and the defendant mentioned the land division and land category change in the course of contact in preparation of a written consent for land use, but the defendant did not change the form and quality of the land, and written a written consent for land use only for the purpose of securing access roads and written consent for land use, etc. with the plaintiff's consent.