1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is ordered.

1. The grounds for appeal by the plaintiff and the defendant citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance, and even if the evidence submitted in the court of first instance is added to the evidence submitted in this court, the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are justified

Therefore, this court's reasoning is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for the dismissal of part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance as set forth in the following paragraph (2). Thus, this court's reasoning is cited in accordance with the main sentence of

2. The part of the cut-out and the Plaintiff established a farmland connection center to drain the water emitted from the farmland at the lower end of the said embankment. The Defendants installed a drainage pipe to drain the water emitted from the instant waterway at the lower end of the said embankment.

The fourth 8-10 portion of the judgment of the court of first instance, “the plaintiff was from Above 10,000,000,000.”

The 5th of the judgment of the first instance court, “Defendant” in the 13th of the fifth instance judgment, “Defendant” in the 6th instance judgment, and “Defendant” in the 13th of the 6th instance judgment as “Defendants,” respectively, and “Defendants,” in the 6, 7 and 14th of the 7th instance judgment as “Defendants,” respectively.

The 8th judgment of the first instance is made by converting the "waterway drainage hole and farmland connection pipe" into the "farmland connection pipe, etc.".

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the first instance is justifiable, and both the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed. In the disposition of the first instance judgment, the phrase “D 8,540 square meters” in Article 1 of the judgment of the first instance is obvious that it is a clerical error of “8,540 square meters in the area of H miscellaneous land in Yong-Namnam-gun, Jeonnam-gun, and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition.