1. The defendant's Suwon District Court 2004Na1145 confirmed the defendant's right of passage over surrounding land. 2005Na9101.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant continued a dispute over whether to recognize the right of passage over surrounding land from the road to the point of five stories above the ground C and D ground (hereinafter “the instant leisure building”), in the case of harmony owned by the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff did not reach an agreement. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant as the Suwon District Court 2003Kadan20783 around 203.

B. On June 20, 2005, the appellate court of the above lawsuit (U.S. District Court 2004Na1145 (principal lawsuit), 2005Na9101 (Counterclaim), during the course of the appellate trial, the Defendant filed a counterclaim against the Plaintiff against the Plaintiff for the removal of concrete packaging and the claim for damages arising from illegal possession of the above passage part while the Plaintiff opened a passage from the road to the leisure building of the instant case in the course of constructing the said leisure building. On June 20, 2005, the conciliation protocol (hereinafter “instant conciliation protocol”) was established between the Plaintiff and the Defendant as follows (hereinafter “instant conciliation”).

Conciliation Provisions

1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) confirms that the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) had the right to passage surrounding land on the part of the Plaintiff, in sequence, connected each point of 14, 15, 16, 22, and 14 square meters in the attached Form No. 14, 15, 16, 22, and 14, which are 87 square meters in the ship and 961 square meters in G, among the same map No. 1, 2, 20, 19, 22, 16, and 14, which are 46 square meters in the ship, connected each point of which is 1, 2, 20,0

2. The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff shall not perform any act detrimental to the passage of the Plaintiff-Counterclaim Defendant and the Mour customer with respect to the part of the land on which the said traffic right extends.

3. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is a land rent for the part of the land on which the above traffic right has been affected by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and is in the same manner as the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) first ceases the above traffic or the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) loses the above land ownership until the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Plaintiff) ceases the traffic.