1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

[Claim]

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of a forest land 29,363 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”). The Defendant is the owner of a D forest land 24,006 square meters (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”).

B. Around July 2013, the Plaintiff entered into an oral agreement with the Defendant on the establishment of a passage route (hereinafter “instant agreement”), and paid the Defendant KRW 10 million on September 30, 2013, and KRW 10 million on November 8, 2013, respectively, in accordance with the said agreement.

C. On February 17, 2016, the Defendant filed a lawsuit for confirmation, etc. of the right to passage over surrounding land with the Seoul District Court Decision 2014Ga1286, and filed a lawsuit for confirmation of the right to passage over surrounding land with respect to E, the Defendant sought confirmation of the right to passage over surrounding land, as to part of the F forest (former lot number G) in Gangwon-gun, Gangwon-do, for which H sought confirmation of the right to passage over the surrounding land, and sought confirmation of the right to passage over the surrounding land (former lot number J). However, on February 17, 2016, the

On the other hand, the defendant appealed and continues to appeal as the Chuncheon District Court 2016Na848.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant would open a passage to the plaintiff's land and the defendant's land through the plaintiff's land and the defendant's land through the plaintiff's land and the defendant's land, i.e., the Gangseo-gun F forest and the Gangseo-gun I forest, etc. owned by the Eul-gun, which is owned by the plaintiff, with a view to trusting the use of land prepared by H and allocating construction costs, and paid KRW

However, the above H’s consent to land use was forged by the Defendant, and the road construction has not been completed at present. Thus, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages incurred by the tort committed by deceiving the Plaintiff for KRW 20 million and damages for delay.

In addition, the agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant is a state of delay of performance or impossibility of performance according to the defendant's cause attributable to the plaintiff.