1. The plaintiff's appeal and the defendant's appeal are all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance regarding this case is that the plaintiff and the defendant set forth in paragraph (2) below are the grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to additional examination of the grounds for the previous argument at the court of this case, and thus, they are cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. Additional determination as to the assertion of the Plaintiff and the Defendant

A. As to the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal No. 2

A. The Defendant asserts that the Defendant’s denial of the Plaintiff’s right to passage constitutes an abuse of rights, in light of the following: (a) the Defendant’s refusal of the right to exclusive use of and benefit from the land as indicated in paragraph (2) (hereinafter “E”) was an abuse of rights, on the ground that the Defendant renounced the exclusive right to use and benefit from the land; and (b) the effect of the right to access the land in this case extends to the Defendant who acquired the land in this case with knowledge; and (c)

However, even if the passage route was used for the passage of the instant land, etc. sold to the Plaintiff as well as other adjacent land owned by the Defendant, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant renounced the exclusive and exclusive right to use and benefit from the passage route.

In addition, as long as the Plaintiff was able to contribute to the Plaintiff’s contribution through part of the land purchased from the Defendant, it is difficult to view that the Defendant sold the land to the Plaintiff, and in the same case as the instant case where no necessary passage is available by transferring part of the land to the Plaintiff, the right to passage over the surrounding land owned by

B. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant opened a passage from the land of this case to the Han-gu Nitch in Suwon-si, the upper part of the land of this case and contributed to the Plaintiff’s contribution. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion D.