1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for dismissal or addition as follows. Thus, this case is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

In the text of the judgment of the first instance, "this court" shall be deemed "the first instance court".

The following shall be added between 10 pages 1 and 2:

The Plaintiff asserts to the effect that “Road is not a private road,” and thus, it cannot be evaluated as a road, and that it should be evaluated as a “forest.” However, in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as a result of the survey and appraisal by the appraiser and appraiser, the part of the L land assessed as “road,” which was used as an orchard and dry field among the above appraisal, is recognized as having been used as a “road,” and the warehouse owned by the Plaintiff, which is installed on the K land, is connected to the warehouse owned by the Plaintiff, and is deemed as a passage installed by the Plaintiff for the convenience of his/her own land. As such, it appears that the Plaintiff had the substance of the road as a road, and that the part of the land among the above L land, which is evaluated as a “road,” which is a “road,” and that it is reasonable to view that it constitutes a “private road,” under the premise that it is a “road,” and that it constitutes a “road use” under Article 26(2) of the Enforcement Rule of the Land Act.

(4) The Plaintiff’s assertion on this part is without merit. The “Land Compensation Guidelines” of 11 pages 10 is completely amended on February 28, 2018 of the former Guidelines for Land Compensation.