1. The plaintiffs' primary claims are dismissed.

2. The defendant shall also indicate 6, 7, 8, and 8, as shown in the attached reference among the 3479 square meters of the 3479 square meters prior to Kuju-si.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the co-owner of the E-Y-si 4284 square meters and the owner of the F-M 608.5 square meters, and the Plaintiff B is the owner of G 1686 square meters (hereinafter collectively referred to as “the Plaintiff’s land”). The Defendant is the owner of the land owned by the Defendant prior to D 3479 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant’s land”).

B. At the same time, the Plaintiffs had access to the land owned by the Plaintiffs through (b) part of the land owned by the Defendant under the Defendant’s implied consent.

C. However, the date of dispute over the use of the passage route between the plaintiff A and the defendant, and the bridge installed in the ditch in the part (b) of the plaintiff A to file a complaint with the related agency as an unlawful structure. Accordingly, the defendant removed the water pipe reclaimed in accordance with the restoration order issued by the related agency in order to restore the land to the original state. The passage has no way in the process, and the plaintiffs are currently unable to enter the road through this part.

On the other hand, when the part (b) cannot be used, the Plaintiffs enter the land owned by the Plaintiffs using the 19 square meters of the portion (c) portion (c) part (c) part (c) in the ship connected in sequence with the 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 of the land owned by the Defendant among the land owned by the Defendant, the Plaintiffs enter the land owned by the Plaintiffs using the 826 square meters of the land prior to H, 100 square meters prior to I, 204 square meters prior to I, and J (hereinafter “instant passage”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 8 through 10, 16, 18 (including each number), the result of the on-site inspection by this court, the result of the appraiser K's survey and appraisal, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. The plaintiffs' land owned by the plaintiffs is no way to enter a public road as a master land.

(2) The part is the only passage through which the plaintiffs can operate the vehicles necessary for farming company, such as cultivating dry field.

(2) On the part of the plaintiffs, the defendant is recognized as the right to passage over surrounding land under Article 219(1) of the Civil Act.