1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of a house of 139 square meters and its ground (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned land”) in the Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, the Plaintiff is the owner of the land and the building owned by the Plaintiff.

B. The Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “the Intervenor”) is the owner of Hancheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, 252 square meters (hereinafter “inland owned by the Intervenor”).

C. In order to remove existing buildings on the land owned by the Intervenor and construct three detached houses (multi-family houses and second class neighborhood living facilities) on October 12, 2018, the Intervenor filed an application for building permission to the Defendant on October 12, 2018.

On November 19, 2018, the Defendant issued a building permit to the Intervenor.

(hereinafter “Disposition of this case”). 【The ground for recognition of this case’s Disposition of this case’s Disposition of this case’s No. 1, 2, and 1 of Gap’s No. 1, 1, and Eul’s No. 1 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff used part of the land owned by the intervenor as a passage for about 80 years to pass a public road on the land owned by the plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as "the land in this case"), and the building permission for the building owned by the plaintiff was granted under the premise that the plaintiff could pass through the above passage through the land owned by the plaintiff on the land owned by the plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as "the land in this case"). Thus, the plaintiff has the right to pass over the surrounding land.

However, if the intervenor constructs a new building based on the disposition of this case, the plaintiff is no longer allowed to pass through the above-mentioned land.

In addition to the above passage roads, there are a alley length that can grow to the public from the land owned by the plaintiff, but the above alley is narrow so that the width of the above alley is so narrow that it is impossible to access the vehicle, it is not an index that can continue to be used, and it is difficult to substantially pass through due to the risks and risks.

Furthermore, the defendant and the intervenor have known the plaintiff as they take measures such as design change so that they can secure the plaintiff's right of passage over surrounding land.