beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation in this case is as follows. Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 18 through 20 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) which is insufficient to recognize the plaintiff's assertion as evidence submitted at the court of the first instance, Gap evidence No. 21, and the fact-finding results of the family office of this court are rejected. The defendant's assertion emphasized or added "2. Additional Judgment" is the same as the part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of the first instance, and thus it is cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
The results of on-site inspection by this court shall be as follows: "The results of on-site inspection by the court of first instance" shall be as the results of on-site inspection by the court of first instance."
Part 6 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be written with "No. 11 through No. 14, No. 18, and No. 21" in Part 6 of the judgment of the court of first instance.
2. In order to pass through the Defendant’s land owned by the Plaintiff seeking confirmation of the right to passage over surrounding land, the Defendant’s additional determination ought to pass through the part of 18248 square meters of S forest land owned by a third party, part of 18248 square meters of H forest and 9620 square meters of land owned by the Defendant, and the part of 200 square meters between the part of 3402 square meters of NY owned by the Defendant with permission to occupy and use public waters and the part of 3402 square meters of land owned by the State, which is owned by the Defendant, and even if the Plaintiff is verified the right to passage over surrounding land in the instant case, the Plaintiff’s present danger and apprehension in the Plaintiff’
In a lawsuit for confirmation, there is a dispute between the parties as to the legal relationship subject to confirmation, and thereby, it is the most effective and appropriate means to determine the plaintiff's legal status as a confirmation judgment to eliminate the anxiety and risk when the plaintiff's legal status is unstable and dangerous.