beta
Text
1. The Defendant (Appointed Party) and the Selection C indicated in the attached Form 11, 12, 13, 17, among the land size of 360 square meters in Seosan-si D, Seosan-si.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is the owner of 44.28 square meters in Seosan, Seosan-si, E. 96 square meters (hereinafter “the Plaintiff’s land”) and 44.28 square meters in a single-story house with the above ground wooden tank and branch roof, and the Defendant (the appointed party; hereinafter “Defendant”) and the Appointor C (hereinafter “Defendant and the Appointor C”) are co-owners of the 360 square meters in Seosan-si, Busan-si, and adjacent to the Plaintiff’s land (hereinafter “Defendant, etc.”).
B. The Plaintiff used part of the instant Defendant’s land as a passage to the FF road, which was a contribution to the Plaintiff’s land. The Defendant, etc., when constructing the instant building on the Defendant’s land, packages the part on which the said passage had existed, and uses the parking partition line as a parking lot.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 6 (including additional numbers), the result of the on-site inspection by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The allegations and judgment of the parties
A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) The former owner of the Plaintiff’s land in this case and the Plaintiff used a total of 27 square meters for the purpose of passage along the Defendant’s land, a total of 11,12,13,17, 18, 19, and 11 square meters of “bbbb” portion (hereinafter “the instant portion”) connected with each of the instant items in the order of the Defendant’s land and 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 13 of the same drawings.
However, the defendant, etc. newly constructed a building on the defendant's land of this case and removed the above passage roads, thereby hindering the plaintiff's passage.
Therefore, the Plaintiff has the right of passage over surrounding land with respect to the sum of 27 square meters in total of the instant “bb” and “three-dimensional” portion.
(2) Recognizing that the Defendant’s assertion against the Plaintiff has the right to passage over surrounding land among the Defendant’s land.
However, the width of the existing passage used by the plaintiff is 1m.