1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion is the co-owner of the land indicated in the attached list (hereinafter “instant land”), and the owner of the H land adjacent to the instant land, which is the owner of the land adjacent to the reinforced military unit (hereinafter “Adjoining land”).

The Plaintiff, as co-owners of the instant land, has the right to use the instant land, and Article 218(1) of the Civil Act Article 218(1) of the same Act provides that the landowner is unable to install the necessary water supply, minority, gas pipes, electric wires, etc. or requires excessive costs without passing through another’s land, he/she may pass through another’s land and install the land.

However, it is necessary to select the place and method where the damage is the lowest, to install it, and to compensate for the damage at the request of the owner of other land.

Pursuant to this section, the owner of the adjoining land has the right to use the land in this case.

Although the Plaintiff intended to perform water supply works through the water pipe of the instant land, it would obtain the Defendants’ consent to land use from the co-owners of the instant land at the reinforcement water supply business place, which is the co-owners of the instant land. As such, the Plaintiff seeks confirmation of the right to use

2. Determination

A. According to Articles 263 through 265 of the Civil Act regarding the assertion that a co-owner has the right to use, co-owners may use and take profits from all the co-owned property at the ratio of shares, they may not dispose of or alter the jointly-owned property without the consent of other co-owners, and the matters concerning the management of the jointly-owned property shall be determined by the majority of shares of co-owners

According to Gap evidence No. 1, the fact that the plaintiff is a co-owner with 33/276 shares of the land of this case is recognized.

However, this only cannot be said to have the right to use the land of this case without the consent of the other co-owners of the land of this case for the alteration of disposal of water supply works. Thus, this part of the plaintiff's right to use.