1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff A is the owner of each land listed in the separate sheet 1 to 6, and the plaintiff B is the owner of each land listed in the separate sheet 7 through 9 (hereinafter referred to as "the land owned by the plaintiffs") listed in the separate sheet 1 to 1.

B. The Defendant is also owned by the owner of each land listed in the separate sheet 10 to 12 (hereinafter “Defendant-owned land”) around the land owned by the Plaintiffs, and the buildings used as restaurant, etc. on each ground listed in the separate sheet 10 and 12.

C. A D (hereinafter “instant meritorious deed”) exists adjacent to the front of the land owned by the Defendant, and the land owned by the Plaintiffs exists behind the land owned by the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5 (including each number), the result of the on-site inspection by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiffs' assertion 1) The passage leading to the instant contribution from the land owned by the defendant had existed from around 1988, and around 2007, the defendant constructed a building on the land owned by the defendant, which was obstructed by the defendant. Around 2008, a new passage leading to the defendant's construction of the above building which is used as a restaurant again was established, and the plaintiffs could pass through the instant contribution from the land owned by the plaintiffs through which the plaintiffs could pass through the said new road. Since around 2015, the defendant prevented the passage through the newly established road from entering the land owned by the plaintiffs. 2) Accordingly, the passage leading to the plaintiffs from the land owned by the plaintiffs to the instant contribution to the instant contribution was all set up. Accordingly, the plaintiffs have the right to pass through the road of this case according to Article 219 of the Civil Act, and the defendant is obliged not to interfere with the plaintiff's use of the road of this case and the construction of the road of this case.

B. The right of passage over the surrounding land is recognized only when there is no passage between the ownership and the public road, which is necessary for the use of the surrounding land.