1. The defendant confirms that the plaintiffs have a right to passage over surrounding land with respect to the size of 166 square meters in Gangwon-do E-gun, Gangwon-do.

2...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Plaintiff A is the owner of 3/2 shares of 3/2 shares among 906§³ in Gangwon-gun, Gangwon-do (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”). Plaintiff B is the owner of a farming house newly built on the ground of the Plaintiff’s land; Plaintiff C is a person who, around May 2013, leases the instant farming house from Plaintiff B and engages in the business of gathering and selling medicinal herbss with the trade name “G”.

B. The Defendant is the owner of 952 square meters in Jinwon-gun, Gangwon-do, the neighboring land on the part of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”) and 166 square meters in E large scale (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”).

C. The Plaintiff’s land is surrounded by the Defendant’s land 1, 2, and Dowon-gun (“I land”), J land (hereinafter “J land”), and K ditch, etc. without having access to the public road, as shown in the attached Form 1. However, the Plaintiffs have access to the Hanwon-gun L service, which is a cement-shaped road by using the land on the Defendant’s side.

On the other hand, at spring around 2017, the Defendant laid down a stone shed at the boundary point of the Defendant’s land and I land, and two land on the Defendant’s side (attached Form 1: 1 through 6, 1 in sequence connected each point) and the boundary point of the Plaintiff’s land on the part of the Plaintiff’s land, embling earth and sand at a height of 2 meters on the part of the Defendant’s land and two land. On December 2017, 6 pine trees were planted on the part of the Defendant’s land.

As a result, it has become difficult for the plaintiffs to enter the public service by using the land of the defendant 2.

[Ground of recognition] without any dispute, Gap's 2, 3, 4, 8, 11 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), each statement, Gap's 7, 12, and 18; the video of this court's on-site inspection result; the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The plaintiffs asserted that there is no passage between the plaintiff's land and the public road, and therefore they cannot enter the public road without passing through the defendant's land, which is the surrounding land. Thus, the plaintiffs' right to passage over the surrounding land should be recognized on the premise that the right to passage over the surrounding land should be recognized.