1. The judgment of the first instance, including a claim that the Plaintiff added and exchangedly changed at the trial.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 28, 2016, the Plaintiff, as the current owner of the land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant land”), completed the registration of ownership transfer on April 28, 2016 as the receipt of the Busan District Court’s Dong Branch Branch’s receipt of 21670, on the ground of sale by voluntary auction on April 21, 2016.

B. The Defendant, as the owner of the Busan Southern-gu E-based Damo (hereinafter “the instant cartel”) adjacent to the instant land, is also the owner of the Domo-supported signboard facilities installed on the instant land (hereinafter “instant facilities”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1-2, Gap evidence 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above fact-finding on the claim for the exclusion of disturbance, the defendant, barring special circumstances, has the duty to remove the facility of this case and deliver the land of this case to the plaintiff who requested the exclusion of disturbance based on ownership, barring special circumstances. 2) The defendant's argument as to the claim of this case is erroneous since the land of this case is a land in a three-dimensional shape located near the access road of this case and it is difficult for the plaintiff to use it independently. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is proved to the purport that since the land of this case was used as a passage of neighboring residents by giving up the exclusive right to use and benefit from the land of this case prior to the acquisition of ownership of the land of this case.

In this regard, the original owner of the land has provided a part of the land as a site for a road without compensation and has waived the exclusive and exclusive rights to use the land and accordingly has specified the ownership of the land after the residents have passed the land without compensation.