1. The Defendant, among the 45,783 square meters in Pyeongtaek-si Park, shall in sequence indicate 3,4,20,19, and 3 the attached appraisal map among the 45,783 square meters.

1. (i) The right to passage over surrounding land under Article 219 of the Civil Act, if there is no passage necessary for the use of the surrounding land between a piece of land and a public road, can be acknowledged as not only where the owner of the surrounding land is unable to enter the public road at all without passing over or passing over the surrounding land, but also where excessive expenses are required. Even if there is already an existing passage, it is recognized as a case where it does not actually function as a passage because it is inappropriate for the use of the pertinent land (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2004Da63521, Dec. 9, 2005; 2010Da54931, Dec. 9, 2010; 2010Da54931, Dec. 1, 2010; 1) the land owner’s name and the entire purport of pleading’s cadastral survey results, and 2) the land owner’s boundary of each of the instant parks can be recognized as a piece of land owned by the Defendant Park.

According to the above facts, there is no access road necessary for the use of farmland between each land of this case and each public road, or at least an excessive cost is required to enter the land. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the plaintiff can assert the right to passage over surrounding land under Article 219 of the Civil Act.

The defendant has preserved and contaminated the natural environment surrounding the National Land Planning and Utilization Act as the infrastructure created in accordance with Article 2, subparagraph 6 (b) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act.