1. Each of the plaintiffs' claims is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 23, 2015, the Plaintiffs are the owners who completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to each 1/2 share of 1/2 of the 2,233 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned land”).

B. On November 28, 2002, when the right to a site registration was completed on November 28, 2002, F. F. The Defendant is a self-management organization organized by the aforementioned apartment occupants.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2-1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion

A. An annexed list to cultivate land owned by the Plaintiffs

1. A list of the annexed lists that need to operate a small black Track (hereinafter referred to as the “instant black Track”)

2. The road 385 meters (hereinafter “instant road”) within the apartment complex from the instant C Apartment-gu to the Domsan Domsan-ro area as indicated in the drawing is a road provided to the general public, and the Plaintiffs have the right to pass through the instant road by using the Trackter.

B. The road of this case is the only passage from the service of the plaintiffs to the land owned by the plaintiffs with the operation of the land of this case by the plaintiffs, and the right of passage to the surrounding land under Article 219 of the Civil Code is not suitable for the operation of the land of bypass as a slope is serious.

C. Nevertheless, the defendant is refusing the plaintiffs to pass the road of this case by driving the Track of this case, so the defendant shall not obstruct the plaintiffs to pass the road of this case by driving the Track of this case.

3. Determination

A. As a matter of course, a person seeking to pass through a road provided for the general public only on the ground that any land is in a state of being provided for the passage of the general public.