beta
Text
1. All appeals filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) are dismissed.
2.A claim added by this Court.
Reasons
1. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is based on the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, as stated in Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Determination as to the claim on the principal lawsuit
A. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: (a) the Defendants added or emphasized in the trial.
In addition to the judgment of the court of first instance, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is cited by applying the main text of Article 420 of the Civil
B. The Defendants’ assertion 1) even if the Plaintiff’s right of passage over surrounding land against the Defendants’ land is recognized, the scope of recognition of the right of passage should be limited only to approximately two meters wide from the Plaintiff’s land necessary for wruscit farming. (2) The determination of the right of passage over surrounding land as stipulated in Article 219 of the Civil Act is particularly recognized at risking the damage of the owner of the right of passage to the public interest, which is the use of land without a passage necessary for its use, for the public interest, between the public interest and the public interest. As such, in determining the width and location of the passage, etc. of the right of passage, the method should be considered less than the largest damage to the owner of the right of passage, but at least the scope necessary for the owner of the right of passage to the land should be permitted. Whether the degree should be considered to be necessary should be determined based on the geographical, location, shape and use relationship of the land between the Plaintiff’s land and the neighboring land’s understanding situation
(1) The Defendants’ land in this case are categorized as a road, the category of which is narrow and narrow, and the entire area of which is used as a road for a long time. In other words, the Defendants’ land in this case has long been used as a road.