1. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Defendant B, without any title, installed concrete packaging (hereinafter “instant road”) on the ground of 66 square meters on the part (A) of the attached drawing indicating 1, 2, 3, 23, 22, 21, and 1, connected in the ship (hereinafter “instant land”) among the land owner of the instant land, which is not the Plaintiff’s title, and installed 1.7m or 2m or 2m or above in height on the line connected each point of 3,23m or 2m or above among the above land without any title. The Plaintiff, as the owner of the instant land, sought a removal of interference and delivery against the Defendants, as described in the purport of the claim.

2. The Defendants asserted that Defendant B’s concrete packaging on the instant road with the Plaintiff’s consent and used it as access roads to village users including Defendant B. At the time of the aforementioned packing, Defendant Cyang constructed a stone shed to store natural stone on the surface of the instant road and thereafter built a stone shed to reinforce the existing stone axis due to the collapse risk. The Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff’s claim for delivery, etc. of the instant road, which waived exclusive use and profit-making rights on the instant road, is groundless.

3. Each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 (including the provisional number) are considered as a whole to the purport of the entire pleadings, namely, the following circumstances, i.e., the D land before division is jointly owned by plaintiff E, defendant Eul-B, and G, and the owner of the land changed after the construction of the road in this case, and the owner of the land in this case was changed, and the J land was subdivided into J and K land on August 23, 2013, and the ownership transfer registration due to the cancellation of title trust was completed as owned by the defendant Eul, K land was divided into H and I, and the plaintiff permitted the construction of the road in this case for the convenience of village people at F's request, and the defendant Eul allowed the construction of the road in this case on the road in this case in this case in this case in this case in this case in this case in this case in 194.