1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Presumed facts

A. On November 6, 2009, the Plaintiff is holding the entire land by completing each registration of ownership transfer with respect to 331/1,345 shares out of B river No. 274 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”). On February 4, 2014, the Plaintiff is holding the entire land after completing each registration of ownership transfer with respect to 1,014/1,345 shares out of the aforementioned real estate.

On November 6, 2009, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to 331/1,345 shares of C river 38 square meters (hereinafter “instant two land”) in Namyang-si, Namyang-si. On February 4, 2014, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with D with respect to 9/1,345 shares out of the foregoing real estate, and is currently a co-ownership holder with respect to 232/1,345 shares.

B. Among the land in this case, among the land in this case, the part on the ship (b) part (b) and part (b) of 8 square meters connected with each point of 1, 2, 3, 8, 9, and 1 of the annexed drawing among the land in this case and the part (d) of 11 square meters (hereinafter referred to as the “part (d) of the annexed drawing among the land in this case) connected each point of 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 3 of the annexed drawing among the land in this case and the part (d) of the annexed drawing among the two land in this case are contained in the asphalt package.

In order to recover from the flood disaster around 1992, the Defendant performed the Assp packing work on the roads located on the said F and G land, together with the instant (b) and (d) parts, as above, in the course of performing the Assp packing work on the roads located on the said F and G land.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant road”). Around 2011, the Defendant performed the construction of the said road as a water pipeline laid 100 meters away from the underground of the instant road.

The road of this case is the only road where the vehicle can pass after a golf course, a pharmaceutical company, a health food company, a house, etc.

C. Around November 17, 2014, the Plaintiff consented to the designation of a road with respect to three square meters of the instant part (b) in order to obtain a building permit for the construction of a new building and the designation of a road for the above B and one parcel of land. The said part of the land is currently being used as an access road to the said building.

[Reasons for Recognition]