1. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendants dismissed the part of the claim for the confirmation of the right of passage over surrounding land.

2. The plaintiff's defendants.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of 681m2 (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”). The Defendants are co-owners of 257.5/707 shares in the case of Defendant B among the 707m2 (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”), Defendant C’s share in 191.8/707 shares in the case of Defendant C, and shares in 257.7/707 shares in the case of Defendant D.

B. The Plaintiff’s land is bordering on the Defendants’ land, and the Defendants’ land is in the entire part abutting on the Plaintiff’s land and its boundary. The Defendants’ land is in the asphalt package (However, from the Plaintiff’s land boundary to the asphalt package, there is an interval of about 80 cm between the Defendants’ land and the Defendant’s land, which is being used as a road for a long time.)

C. From February 26, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) filed a new report with the Office of Budget and constructed a house to build a housing on the Plaintiff’s land; (b) around April 2013, the budget Eup demanded the construction company to carry out construction work to cover a container; and (c) the Plaintiff, among the Defendants’ land, carried out a new asphalt package on the part (b) of the attached Form No. 11, 12, 13, 14, and 11, which was the soil path for the part entering the Plaintiff’s housing among the Defendants’ land, in turn, connected each point of the said part (hereinafter “instant land”).

The Defendants filed a civil petition requesting the removal of the asphalt on the instant land because the Defendants’ packaging of the asphalt constitutes a development act. The Budget Office received a written consent from the Defendants to the Plaintiff in order to file a civil complaint, and delayed the Plaintiff’s approval for the use of the newly-built house until August 2014.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry and video of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, and 8, the result of the on-site inspection conducted by this court, the result of the appraiser G's survey and appraisal conducted by the appraiser G, the result of the fact inquiry into the budget group of this court, the result of the fact inquiry conducted on September 18, 2014 to the budget Eup of this court,

2. The plaintiff.