1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)

A. Of the area of 242 square meters in Spocheon-si D, the attached drawing Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4,5.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. The land owned by the Plaintiff and the land owned by the Plaintiff 632 square meters (hereinafter “E”) prior to Sincheon-si is 552 square meters prior to Sincheon-si. The land owned by the Plaintiff 428/52 square meters prior to Sincheon-si (hereinafter “F land”) and the land owned by the Defendant at the ratio of 124/52 shares, and the land owned by the Defendant 78 square meters adjacent to Sincheon-si (hereinafter “G land”) is the land owned by the Plaintiff B, the ownership transfer registration of which was completed under Plaintiff B on July 28, 2014.

The land of this case (hereinafter “instant land”) is the land owned by the Defendant, the ownership transfer registration of which was completed on October 11, 2013.

(b) The land E, F, G and the land in this case adjoining one another, and the land in this case should pass through the land in this case in order to obtain access to a public road from E, F, and G land.

C. On April 12, 2017, the Defendant installed iron pents (hereinafter “instant pents”) on the ground that connects each point of the instant land indicated in the Appendix No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 1 among the instant land on April 12, 2017, and the Plaintiffs suffered interference with the Plaintiffs’ access to E land, F land, and G land.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy Facts, Gap evidence 1, 2, 5, Eul evidence 6 (including branch numbers), each of these statements and images, the result of the on-site inspection by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the principal lawsuit

A. The facts that the plaintiffs are not allowed to enter the land of this case without using the land of this case as to the claim for confirmation of the right to passage over surrounding land are acknowledged as above. In light of the aforementioned facts, Gap evidence 2, 5-1, 2, 3, 6, 7-2, 6-7, Eul evidence 6-1, 2, and 6-3 of this case's land of this case, shape such as length, width, area, etc. of the land of this case recognized as a whole as a whole after the on-site inspection of this court, and other all other circumstances such as the relation of use and usage of the land of this case, the plaintiffs' above land of this case as a passage for access to the land of this case which are owned by the plaintiffs.