1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The court's explanation of this case is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing it as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(1) The plaintiffs asserted that the current status of this case constitutes a road with a width of at least four meters under the former Building Act, and that it does not interfere with the entry of people and vehicles into the road, and that it is basically a turfed road with a turf block without any distinction between the sidewalk and the roadway, not a turf, and that it is true that the first instance court's judgment is just and just, even if the plaintiffs asserted partial supplement and additionally submitted evidence in the trial, and the fact-finding inquiry reply of the defendant of the party court against the defendant, the present status of this case, like the first instance court's judgment, is that it is not a road that is not a construction for the residents' use of the pro-friendly space, but a road that is not a construction for the residents' use of the pro-friendly space.