1. The plaintiff's appeal and the claims added by this court are all dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit after the appeal are filed.

1. The plaintiff's grounds for appeal on this part of the claim for confirmation of the right to passage over surrounding land and the right to passage over surrounding land are not significantly different from the allegations in the first instance court. Even if the evidence submitted in the first instance court is closely examined, the fact-finding and decision of the first instance court is justified.

Therefore, the court's explanation on this part is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is cited by applying the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The plaintiff's claim for removal and removal of stone added at the trial of the party is ultimately based on the premise that the plaintiff's right to passage over the surrounding land in the dispute of this case is recognized, and the plaintiff seeks active removal of obstacles impeding the passage of the defendant. As seen earlier, unless the plaintiff's right to passage over surrounding land is acknowledged, the claim for this part of the right to passage on the different premise is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance dismissing the plaintiff's claim for confirmation of the right to passage over surrounding land and the right to prohibit passage over the surrounding land is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit, and the plaintiff's claim for removal and removal of stone added at the court of first instance is also dismissed.