1. The plaintiff's appeal and each of the claims added by this court are all dismissed.

2. After an appeal is filed.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of 1,970 square meters of C forest land in Gwangju City (hereinafter “Plaintiff forest”). The Defendant is the owner of 959 square meters prior to Gwangju City D, adjacent to the Plaintiff forest land (hereinafter “Defendant dry field”), and the current status of land adjacent to the Plaintiff Forest and Forest Defendant dry field (hereinafter “the land is specified only once”) is also indicated in the attached Table.

B. The Plaintiff’s forest and Defendant dry field had E, a mountainous district on the east side of the Plaintiff’s forest and Defendant dry field, and the water path started from E (hereinafter “E”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, the result of appraisal by the court of the trial and the court of the trial (including the result of each supplementary appraisal; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion E-Road flows into I via the original F and Defendant dry field;

(E) On December 2005, the Plaintiff’s existing water length was closed, and a new water length was formed through the Plaintiff’s forest via E and F, by making use of a new water channel (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s claim H water channel”) that flows up immediately adjacent to the instant sperm structure (hereinafter “the Plaintiff’s claim”). However, around December 2005, the Defendant performed the Plaintiff’s horizontal work for Defendant Field, and installing the instant stone axis and the instant sperm structure, and installing a new water channel (hereinafter “the Plaintiff’s claim”).

Since the above new water length interferes with the Plaintiff’s exercise of ownership in the Plaintiff’s forest land, the Defendant is obligated to remove the above structures, re-establish the existing water path, and fill the Plaintiff’s forest land damaged by the formation of the said new water path.

3. According to the records in Eul evidence No. 6 and the result of the appraisal by the appraiser J of the trial court, the defendant performed embling work in the defendant dry field without obtaining permission around 2005, and he stockpiled the instant stone axis, and there is a waterway passing over the plaintiff's forest land via E from the plaintiff's forest land to the plaintiff's forest land (hereinafter "the plaintiff's forest land waterways").