The judgment below

The part of the case against the plaintiff (appointed party) shall be reversed, and this part of the case shall be remanded to the Changwon District Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the ground of appeal by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) (hereinafter “Plaintiff”)

A. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, based on the adopted evidence, the court below acknowledged the following facts: (a) the Plaintiff is the right holder of the land in Gyeongcheon-gun D (hereinafter referred to as “1 forest”; (b) E forest (hereinafter referred to as “2 forest”) is the Plaintiff’s right holder of the forest in Gyeongcheon-gun (hereinafter referred to as “Seoul”) and the registration of preservation of ownership has been completed in the Plaintiff’s protocol in the name of the networkF; (c) the Defendant is the owner of C forest adjacent to the 1 and 2 forest (hereinafter referred to as “third forest”); (c) growing the Plaintiff’s parents grave in 1 forest and 2 forest; and (d) the Plaintiff’s parents grave in 1 forest and 2 forest and 3 (hereinafter collectively referred to as “each of the instant graves”) installed in 1 and 2 forest and 2 forest.

Based on this, the court below rejected the Plaintiff’s claim on the following grounds with respect to the part on board (hereinafter “land to be verified”) connected in order to reach each of the instant graves located in the first and second forests from contributions, which were connected in order to the Defendant, in the order of reaching each of the instant graves located in the first and second forests, by the mark 1 through 21, and 1, indicated in the annexed drawings of the judgment of the court below among the third forests (hereinafter “land to be verified”).

(1) The Plaintiff’s proof of the fact that the only land connected to the first and second forests is the land to be confirmed in the original judgment is insufficient, while the second forests and fields are connected with the meritorious services, it appears that it would be possible to enter the second forests and fields through a meritorious service; even without going through the land to be confirmed, it is determined that the land can be easily entered into the second forests and fields with the meritorious services using other land adjacent to the first and second forests; and the Plaintiff’s access to the second forests and fields through a meritorious service and then the boundary of the land to be confirmed from doorB to doorC.