1. The Defendant marks 37, 38, 19, 20, 37 of the annexed drawings among the 25,583 square meters of Gangwon-gu forest land in Yangwon-gun.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner who completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of the cancellation of title trust on January 18, 2005 with respect to the area of 494m2 (hereinafter “instant land”) located in Gyeyang-gu, Suwon-gun, Yangwon-gun (hereinafter “instant land”). The Defendant is the owner of the land owned by the Plaintiff, Yangyang-gu, Yangwon-gun C Forest and 25,583m2 (hereinafter “Defendant-owned land”).

B. The instant land is surrounded by the land owned by the Defendant and E forest, F forest, G forest, and H forest, and the franchising land surrounded by the H forest, and even though the Plaintiff was a temporary farmer, it is still in a state of land franchising.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry and video of Gap evidence 1 and 3, the result of on-site inspection by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. We examine the cause of the claim. The right to passage over surrounding land under Article 219 of the Civil Act, in a case where there is no passage between a certain land and a public road for the use of the surrounding land, is recognized as not only the case where the owner of the surrounding land is unable to enter the public road, but also the case where an excessive cost is required. In light of the above basic facts, in order to properly use the surrounding land, the passage of agricultural machinery necessary for the cultivation and removal of crops is required. However, the above land is surrounded by another land owned by the Defendant and others, and it is impossible to enter the public road at present, so the right to passage over surrounding land should be recognized.

In addition, the scope of the right of passage should be limited at least to the extent necessary to use the land owned by the person having the right of passage, and the degree of necessity should be determined based on the topography, locational shape and use relationship of the land between the two parties, neighboring geographic situation, understanding of the users of the land and all other circumstances according to social norms in a specific case.

Supreme Court Decision 200 delivered on April 2002