1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On March 25, 2004, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to C previously 876 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”). On October 30, 2006, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to B forest land 106,561 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) located adjacent to the Plaintiff’s land on October 30, 206.

B. After acquiring the ownership of the Plaintiff’s land, the Plaintiff cultivated the Plaintiff’s land by using a separate passage (hereinafter “previous passage”) among the instant land, which is not a part (A) part of 138 square meters (hereinafter “instant passage”) connected with each point of the attached drawing Nos. 1 through 14, and 1 among the instant land, and is not a separate passage among the instant land (hereinafter “previous passage”).

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1-1, 2, 2, and 3 of Gap evidence, the result of on-site inspection by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Plaintiff entered the land of this case with an existing passage, thereby making a clerical error.

However, the plaintiff has been suffering from the plaintiff's land, and it is necessary to operate the truck on a regular basis in order to set the farmer's house.

However, the existing traffic routes consisting of the surface of gravels, the operation of the truck is dangerous due to the depth of slope, and the operation of the truck by carrying the wave results in the damage of the surface by transmitting the surface vibration to the wave. Accordingly, the existing traffic routes are not enough to function as the traffic way for the plaintiff to embling the farm in the land by using the vehicle, and it is anticipated that excessive cost will be required for the smooth carboning work of the existing traffic routes.

Therefore, it is impossible for the Plaintiff to use a vehicle on the Plaintiff’s land to form a farmer’s house without using the instant road. Therefore, the Plaintiff seeks confirmation of the right to passage over surrounding land against the Defendant as to the instant road.

3. The defendant's main defense against the safety of the defendant.