The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiffs.

1. The basic facts are the owners of 67,736 square meters and 63,738 square meters of land for a stock farm (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Plaintiff’s land”), which is the Plaintiff’s owner of the land for stock farm (hereinafter referred to as “the Plaintiff’s land”). The Defendant is the owner of the land for stock farm in this case.

The Plaintiffs, while operating a stock farm in the land owned by the Plaintiff, have entered the instant stock farm through the G of the wife population in Yeongdeungpo-si, including the land in the instant stock farm (hereinafter “the instant land”).

The Defendant, among the roads of this case, installed steel fences on the boundary of the land in dispute of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. In order to operate a stock farm in the land owned by the Plaintiff with the right of passage over surrounding land, vehicles, etc. should be allowed to pass from the public road to the land owned by the Plaintiff, and the road in this case is the only passage. The Defendant installed a steel fence on the land in this case, thereby hindering the passage of the Plaintiffs.

Therefore, the plaintiffs sought confirmation of the right to passage over surrounding land on the land in the dispute of this case against the defendant. Accordingly, the defendant shall not remove steel fences installed on the land in the dispute of this case, and shall not perform any act that obstructs the passage of the plaintiffs, such as installing obstacles on the land in the dispute of this case.

B. On 1985, Plaintiff A opened the road of this case and used it in peace and public performance up to the present time, thereby acquiring the passage right to the land of this case.

Therefore, the plaintiffs sought confirmation of the right of access to the land of this case against the defendant. Accordingly, the defendant shall not remove the steel fences installed in the land of this case, and shall not perform any act that obstructs the passage of the plaintiffs, such as installing obstacles on the land of this case.

(c).