1. The Defendant, among the land size of 456 square meters prior to C in Yangyang-si, has each of the following points: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 1:

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an owner who completed the registration of ownership transfer on September 29, 2009 with respect to the land owned by the Plaintiff, as well as the land owned by the Plaintiff on September 29, 2009, with respect to the land of 658 square meters in Gyeyang-si, D, E, 205 square meters in size, 185 square meters in size prior to F, G 357 square meters in size, G, and H 68 square meters in size, and

B. The land owned by the Plaintiff is a blind spot surrounded by forests, reservoirs, etc., and in order to pass a public road on the land owned by the Plaintiff, it is the sole way to build a reservoir among neighboring lands passes through the 456 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

C. On December 2, 2016, the Defendant: (a) completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of the completion of the prescriptive acquisition period, on the part of co-owners, such as Kim Sung, etc., on the instant land in which the instant land remains unregistered, and occupied rice, shoulder, shoulder, and straw, and completed the registration of ownership transfer due to the completion of the prescriptive acquisition.

On December 29, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a provisional injunction against interference with the Changwon District Court smuggling 2014Kahap2030 against the Defendant, and received a decision from the same court on December 29, 2014 that “the Defendant, among the instant land, shall collect agricultural products located in (A) part 68 square meters in the ship connecting each point of (a), (b), (c), (d), (v), (f), and (a) of the instant land, and shall not interfere with the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s use of the said land as a passage through the road,” and then, he then sealed cement packaging in the said part of the said land.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, each description of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, 8, 11, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The scope of traffic rights to surrounding land under Article 219 of the Civil Act is limited to the use of surrounding land for the purpose of using the land without a passage necessary for the use of the land between the public road and the public road. As such, the scope of traffic rights is not only necessary for the owner of the traffic rights but also for the owner of surrounding land