1. The plaintiff's action against the defendant is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's claims against the defendant B and C are all filed.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner who completed the registration of ownership transfer on August 3, 2004 with respect to the land owned by the Plaintiff, which is not less than 660 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned land”). Defendant C owns the E-ground building in the original city.

The area of 245 square meters prior to the Gangwon-do Seoul Special Metropolitan City D is owned by Nonparty G.

B. The Plaintiff was granted a construction permit on June 19, 2015 to newly construct a farm house on the land owned by the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-5, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 1-1, Eul evidence 1-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a new construction of a farm house on the land owned by the Plaintiff. For a construction, a road is needed to enter the land owned by the Plaintiff by using the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and the land to be verified is subject to either “divable” or “bb”

The Defendants interfere with the passage of the sections of the iv) and b) “B” subject to confirmation.

In other words, Defendant B interfered with the Plaintiff’s passage by arbitrarily altering fences on the land to be confirmed, and Defendant C interfered with the Plaintiff’s passage by blocking the part of “bbb” land to be confirmed, and send the Plaintiff a letter of request for reinstatement due to illegal occupation of state-owned land to the Plaintiff at the original city managing the Defendant’s property.

Since the Plaintiff’s right to passage over surrounding land under Article 219(1) of the Civil Act is recognized with respect to the land to be confirmed, the Plaintiff seeks confirmation of the right to passage and prohibition of traffic interference with the sections of “divities,” or seek confirmation of the right to passage and prohibition of traffic interference with the said sections.

B. The Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant Republic of Korea for confirmation of the right to passage over surrounding land is a matter of entry into the Plaintiff’s land by sending to the Plaintiff a letter of request for restitution due to unauthorized occupation of state-owned land at the original city managing the Defendant’s property.