1. The plaintiff (appointed)'s claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff (Appointed Party; hereinafter “Plaintiff”) owns 2648 square meters and 2845 square meters, etc. (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned land”) prior to the Jeju-do Crossing-gun D. The Appointed-gun, Gangwon-do Crossing-do Crossing-gun, and F owned a house with 543 square meters and above ground, 702 square meters prior to H, 329 square meters, and 122 square meters prior to J. (hereinafter “designated real estate”).

B. The Defendant is the owner who completed the registration of ownership transfer on February 27, 1992 with respect to the portion (B) of 108 square meters in the ship connected each point of the attached Form No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 13, 14, and 1, among the area of 963 square meters in the 963 square meters in Gangwon-do B.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-2 through 9, Gap evidence 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff’s Claimant F has established a farmer’s house or entered a house through land subject to confirmation prior to a hundred and twenty years, and the Defendant is forbidden to enter the SelectionF.

Plaintiff

In order to enter the land owned by the owner and the selected owner's real estate using a vehicle, agricultural machine, etc., it is necessary to pass at least four meters wide, and the land to be verified is the only passage.

Since the right to passage over surrounding land under Article 219(1) of the Civil Act is recognized to the plaintiff and the selected person F with respect to the land to be confirmed, the defendant shall confirm that the plaintiff has the right to passage over the land to be confirmed and shall not interfere with the passage of the designated person.

B. We examine the judgment, the purpose of recognizing the right to passage over surrounding land pursuant to Article 219 of the Civil Code is not only the mutual understanding between neighboring land, but also the social and economic aspects of allowing all land to fully perform its original function.

However, the records of this case, the results of the on-site inspection by this court, and the purport of the whole pleadings.