1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an owner of 284/424 shares in the Gu, Si, U.S. E large 424 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”), and the remainder of 140/424 shares in the Plaintiff’s land is F.

B. The Defendants own 1/2 shares of 414 square meters in the Gu-U.S., Si-si (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1-1, 3, and 5-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that there is no passage to contribute to the Plaintiff’s housing, and thus, the annexed drawing indication (i) and part 61.2 square meters (hereinafter “existing passage”) of the annexed sheet among the area of 850 square meters in the Gu-U.S., Si, Gu-si, Gu-si, Seoul, for several hundred and fifty years has been used as a passage.

After that, the Plaintiff purchased the part of the existing passage from H in the Gu-U.S. G 850 square meters prior to the division.

Afterwards, G land was divided into G large 436 square meters and Defendant land before subdivision, and the network I purchased Defendant land and completed the registration of ownership transfer under the name of J on July 12, 198.

J around June 2004, around 2004, prevented the part (i) of 30.6 square meters on the ship (hereinafter “the part (i) of 30.6 square meters (hereinafter “instant part”) which connects each point of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 among the existing passages by piling up bricks in the middle of the existing passage (hereinafter “the instant wall”). The Plaintiff did not take legal measures since it could enter the middle point of the passage through the land of the Gu-U.S. Si at the time.

After that, the J donated the Defendant’s land to the Defendants around January 2014.

around 2016, the oil car was not able to supply the oil to the Plaintiff’s house from the wind on which the steel fence was installed even on the G land at the Gu-si in 2016. In the event of a fire, the fire fighting stack is also unable to contact the Plaintiff’s house.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s right of passage over surrounding land should be recognized as to the part (i) of the instant case, and the wall installed in the part (i) of the instant case should be removed.

3. Determination

(a) land of any relevant law;