1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On the ground of 387 square meters in the Haman-gun, Haman-gun, Haman-gun, Haman-gun, the buildings indicated in the attached Table (hereinafter “instant building”) consisting of 30 square meters of single-story housing constructed around 1949, 22 square meters of single-story water, and 45.5 square meters of single-story stable constructed in 1982.

B. As to the instant building, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on September 2, 2010 by Nonparty D, on September 2, 2010, Nonparty E, Nonparty F on September 16, 2010, and Nonparty G on December 1, 2010. On March 11, 2015, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer based on inheritance on September 11, 2015.

C. On the ground of land, other than H, located in the Haan-gun, Haan-gun, Haan-gun, the building of this case, a Dogwon (hereinafter “the instant Dogwon”). Nonparty J completed the registration of the instant Dogwon on February 18, 201.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2 (including virtual numbers), Eul evidence 2 and 3 (including virtual numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The Plaintiff asserted that, since the main gate of the instant building owned by the Defendant was installed on the ground of HW 433 square meters in Gyeongnam-gun, Gyeongnam-gun, which is equipped with the instant Dogwon, causing trouble to the Plaintiff’s missionary work, the Plaintiff’s operator of the instant Dogwon claimed KRW 23 million against the Defendant as damages for interference with the missionary work. As to this, the Defendant merely succeeded to the instant building constructed on around 1949, and did not deem that the Plaintiff’s missionary work was interfered with due to the main gate of the instant building.

B. Therefore, in light of the main gate of the building of this case and the location of the main Dogwon of this case, and the form and width of the road leading to the main Dogwon of this case, each of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including the branch number).