logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2018.02.02 2017가단54571
주위토지통행권
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

Basic Facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of C orchard 1,148 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”) in Jeju-si, and the Defendant is the owner of B large 297.2 square meters adjacent to the west of the Plaintiff’s land (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”).

B. The Plaintiff’s land is the franchise.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including a provisional parcel number; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the entire pleadings is the plaintiff's land asserted by the plaintiff. The plaintiff has passed through 52.3 square meters in the part of the ship connected to the defendant's land (hereinafter "the part of this case") in order to make a contribution to cultivating the plaintiff's land. Thus, the defendant should have the right to passage over the surrounding land No. 1 of this case to the plaintiff.

Judgment

If a piece of land has no access to a public road, which is necessary for the use of the land, without passing over the surrounding land, and the owner of the land cannot reach the public road or requires excessive costs, he/she may pass over the surrounding land to the public road, and if necessary he/she may build a passage to the public road.

(Article 219(1) main text of the Civil Act. The right to passage over surrounding land is recognized only when there is no passage necessary for the use of the land between the land owned and the public road. Thus, the right to passage over surrounding land cannot be acknowledged solely on the ground that the passage is more convenient than the use of the passage, if there has already been a passage necessary for the use of the land

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Da1088, Jun. 13, 1995). Since the right of passage over surrounding land is particularly recognized at risk of damage to the owner of the right of passage over the land for the public interest, which is the use of the land without a passage required for its use between the public interest and the meritorious service, the damage to the owner of the right of passage over the land may be the lowest damage to the owner of the right of passage over

arrow