1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 10, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a pre-sale agreement with D on the E-si, E, E, 36 square meters, F, 327 square meters and its ground and 96 square meters, which are owned by D (hereinafter “instant land before the instant partition”). On the same day, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the right to claim ownership transfer based on the pre-sale agreement with respect to the said land.

B. On April 201, G, which is the owner of H land adjacent to the instant land prior to the instant subdivision, newly constructed a house on the said land to the Defendant on or around April 201. At the time, G, which is the owner of the instant land, attached a written consent on road designation from D, which was the owner of the instant land prior to the instant subdivision, with the consent thereto. On April 27, 2011, the Defendant: (a) issued a public announcement on road designation (hereinafter “instant disposition”) with respect to the land prior to the instant subdivision, 20 square meters (divided on December 22, 2011, and became 20 square meters at Echeon-si, I road; hereinafter “instant land”).

C. On April 10, 2012, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer based on the above provisional registration in the name of the Plaintiff with respect to the instant land, including the instant land.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-4 evidence, Eul 3 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The defendant's judgment on the defendant's main defense is to seek confirmation on the invalidity of the disposition of this case, since the plaintiff did not infringe the legal interests protected by the disposition of this case, and thus, the lawsuit of this case should be dismissed.

The interests of the court of first instance should be determined at the time of the closure of the arguments in fact-finding. At the time of the closure of the arguments in this case, the plaintiff, who is the owner of the land in this case, cannot abolish or alter the road without obtaining permission from the competent permitting authority under Article 45 (2) of the Building Act, and the permitting authority shall obtain consent from the interested parties in this case in order to abolish or alter the road.