1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The Defendant also indicated the attached Table 1 appraisal among the land size 20132 square meters in C forest land at the time when the Plaintiff was placed.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of 8518 square meters prior to E, F, 492 square meters prior to F, G forest land, and 3174 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”). The Defendant is the owner of C forest land 20132 square meters prior to D, Jin-si, and 1127 square meters prior to D (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”).

B. The Plaintiff’s land is not allowed to enter the public road without passing over the surrounding land, as it is surrounded by the R forest land to the south, part of C forest land among the Defendant’s land, east forest andO land to the east, west to the north, S prior to T, U, and V forest, etc.

C. On June 30, 1986, the Plaintiff purchased the Plaintiff’s land from W and completed the registration of ownership transfer, and used the land indicated in paragraph (2) of this case (hereinafter “instant surrounding land”). From June 2013, the Plaintiff was entering the Plaintiff’s land by using the land indicated in paragraph (2) of this case (hereinafter “instant surrounding land”). Since June 2013, the Plaintiff disputes over the passage of the Defendant and the instant surrounding land, and is currently interfering with the passage

On the other hand, when the Defendant is the land, the part specified as “b” part of the conjunctive claim as “B” part of C forest land and 199 square meters (hereinafter “the instant conjunctive land”) may be access to G forest land in Jinjin-si, the Plaintiff’s land, and the same part may be access to a road opened by P prior to P ownership, and the said part may be access to a road installed by P prior to the saidO.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1-1 to 4, evidence 2-1, 2, 7, and 14-1, 2, 7, and 14-2, the result of each on-site inspection conducted by the court of first instance and this court, appraiser H and X, the result of each survey appraisal conducted by appraiser H and X, the purport of whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. Plaintiff 1) The Plaintiff had access to a public road through the surrounding land of this case before he had used a considerable portion of Plaintiff’s land as an orchard and had access to the public road through the surrounding land of this case. As such, the Defendant obstructed the passage of surrounding land of this case, the Plaintiff’s right to passage over the surrounding land of this case and the Plaintiff’s right to passage over the surrounding land of this case are prevented. 2) If it