1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an owner of the area of 2744m2 (hereinafter referred to as “number”) prior to Ansan-si, Ansan-si, and D is an owner of the area of 529m2 prior to E.

B. Defendant Ansan-si accepted the request for road installation works to enable vehicles to move between the Plaintiff and neighboring residents of each of the above land, including the Plaintiff, C, the former 2744 square meters and E, and the former 5298 square meters, and implemented the FF farm road and drainage maintenance works between each of the above land around spring in 2010.

C. At the time of the above construction, the Plaintiff and D agreed that part of their own land is incorporated into the above farm road.

[Reasons for Recognition] The absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the result of the appraisal commission to the chief of the Korea Intellectual Property Office Daegu and Gyeongbuk-do Headquarters, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. From among the farm roads existing at the time of the construction of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff indicated posts on D’s boundary 5298 square meters on the basis of the line, and the part of the land owned by the Plaintiff except the farm roads, among the part of the land whose width is 2.5 meters on the basis of the posts, was to be provided by the Plaintiff.

However, the part of the incorporation into the Plaintiff’s land is not measured on the basis of the boundary posts marked on D’s above land while performing the instant construction, and the part of the incorporation into the Plaintiff’s land was measured by piling up cement block, the width of which is wider than 80 cm from D’s above land and farming road boundary part.

As a result, the land owned by the plaintiff was incorporated into the road more than 20 square meters than when the first survey was conducted, the road form was also close to the direction of the plaintiff's land, and the height of the road is higher than 50 centimeters than that of the plaintiff's land so that the plaintiff's agricultural machinery could not enter the orchard.

Therefore, the plaintiff suffered interference with the passage of the plaintiff due to cement concrete roads and cement block of the defendants, so the removal of each facility stated in the purport of the claim is sought.

2. Determinations: The Korea Cadastral Survey Corporation of this Court.