1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

The reasoning for the court’s explanation on the instant case is as follows: (a) the part of the first instance judgment Nos. 5 and 4 “No. 5 and No. 7” is deleted; and (b) the part of the first instance judgment is indicated in the reasoning of the judgment, except for the addition of the following as stated in the fifth and eighth acts; and (c) thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

D) As to this, the Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff renounced the exclusive and exclusive right to use and benefit from the instant land, in light of the following: (a) the Plaintiff sold the instant land to White Construction and received a partial purchase price; (b) the 000 construction agreed to execute road construction before receiving the full purchase price; (c) the 000 construction applied for subdivision of the instant land on behalf of the Plaintiff on behalf of the Plaintiff; and (d) the Plaintiff did not raise an objection to the Defendant for 15 years, knowing that the instant land is being used as a road; and (d) the Plaintiff’s utility value of the Plaintiff’s remaining land adjacent to the instant land being used as a road increased

In a case where a certain private land is naturally occurring or is classified into a proposed road site and actually used as a road for public traffic, if the owner of the land grants the right to free traffic to neighboring residents or the general public by providing the land as a road or gives up exclusive and exclusive rights to use and benefit from the land, the circumstances and the holding period that he/she owns the land, the details and scale of the divided sale of the remaining land, the location and nature of the land to be used as the road, the relationship with neighboring land, the surrounding environment, etc., as well as the remaining land partitioned and sold are effective.