1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to E forest land E 2,149 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned land”) on February 6, 2006 after consultation on partition of the inherited property of the deceased D on September 29, 2005, and owned the said land until now.

B. On April 10, 1996, the Defendant donated the land owned by the Plaintiff, and completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the land owned by the Defendant on the 30th of the same month, and operated a factory on that ground.

C. The specific location of the land owned by the Plaintiff and the land owned by the Defendant is as shown in the attached Form, and the land owned by the Defendant is adjacent to the roads located on the F and G land in the direction at the lower end in the attached Form.

[Recognizing Facts] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including each number), the result of the survey and appraisal by the Korea Appraisal and Land Information Corporation, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The gist of the assertion is to build a new factory on the ground along with I, J, and K-owned neighboring land owned by the Plaintiff after the Plaintiff moved to the tomb of H’s mountain site, a local historic site, established in the land owned by the Plaintiff, which was located in the land owned by the Plaintiff.

The Plaintiff, among the land owned by the Defendant, is entitled to access to the instant land pursuant to Article 219(1) of the Civil Act, on the ground that, without passing through 250m2 (hereinafter “instant land”), the Plaintiff could not have access to the instant land on the part of 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 11 of the attached drawings among the land owned by the Defendant, which was already used as a passage, without passing through 250m2 (hereinafter “instant land”).

However, as the defendant interferes with the plaintiff's passage, it is sought to confirm the right to passage over surrounding land of this case and seek to prohibit the act of interference with passage.

B. Determination 1-related legal principles and the right of passage over surrounding land, unlike the right of passage.