beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
purport, purport, and.
Reasons
1. The reasons for the court’s explanation concerning this case are as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the following determination as to the plaintiff’s assertion, and therefore, they are quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Additional determination
A. another road from the Plaintiff’s assertion to the public road is constructed without the consent of the owner of the land in the above part of the road without permission, and thus, it is necessary to restore the land to its original state because the Plaintiff has no right to pass through the above road. In addition, even if the land in the dispute is used as a passage, it does not significantly impede the use of the entire land owned by the Defendants, and thus, the right to pass over the surrounding land in the dispute of this case should be recognized.
B. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged as comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions and images of the evidence Nos. 1 through 5 and the entire purport of the pleadings by the court of first instance, namely, ① the land owned by another is included in another road leading to the seat of the Plaintiff, but the owner of the land interferes with passage.
It is difficult to recognize the Defendants’ right to passage over the surrounding land of this case solely based on the Plaintiff’s reasoning that there is no evidence that the Plaintiff is demanding to restore the land to its original state or that there is no evidence that the Plaintiff is going to develop the land to a mountainous district or build a factory in the future. ③ The Plaintiff’s right to passage over the surrounding land of this case is difficult due to the Plaintiff’s reasons for convenience of passage. ③ When passing over the center of the Defendants’ land adjacent to public services, it would not only reduce the economic value, but also cause inconvenience to the use of the Defendants’ land according to the current state, such as crops cultivation. ④ As long as passage through the existing other road