1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) indicates to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) the annexed map of the Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, 606 square meters, and 60 square meters of D forest land.

1. Judgment as to the plaintiff's primary principal lawsuit and the defendant's counterclaim

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant, without authority, infringed on the land owned by the Plaintiff and used the instant traffic route as a vehicle traffic and pedestrian traffic, and sought a prohibition of traffic along the instant traffic route against the Defendant.

As to this, the defendant asserts that the defendant cannot enter the land owned by the defendant without passing through the road of this case as a contribution to the land owned by the defendant, and sought confirmation of the right of passage to the road of this case and prohibition of interference with the plaintiff's passage.

B. Determination 1) The Plaintiff, on December 27, 201, is deemed to have recognized the Plaintiff as the Plaintiff’s adjacent land of this case in total, namely, Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, 606 square meters and 60 square meters of forest land (hereinafter “instant adjacent land”).

A) The registration of ownership transfer is completed with respect to the registration of ownership transfer. The Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on May 26, 201, Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, 890 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

A) The registration of ownership transfer is completed with respect to the instant land. The Defendant’s surrounding land right to the instant road cannot pass the instant road to the public road without passing through the instant road among the adjoining land. The Plaintiff’s father F has a concrete package on the instant road. From May 26, 2016 to July 19, 2016, the Plaintiff interfered with the Defendant’s access to the instant road by installing chains on the instant road or parking vehicles from July 2, 2016. [Grounds for Recognition] There is no dispute. The Plaintiff’s ground for recognition], Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul’s evidence No. 2, Eul’s evidence No. 2, Eul’s evidence No. 1, 2, and Eul’s evidence No. 10, as a result of the G appraiser’s survey and appraisal, the purport of the argument is as follows. Thus, the Defendant’s surrounding land right to pass the instant road should pass the instant road to the Defendant’s access to the surrounding land.