1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. The Plaintiff’s judgment as to the cause of the claim is arguing that, among the land owned by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff used approximately 30-40 square meters of forest land C in Ansan-si (hereinafter “the instant forest”) with approximately 10,281 square meters in volume as a charnel grave, and cultivated approximately 200 gys of night tree around April 2009 with respect to the remainder, around 200 gys. However, the Plaintiff can only pass through the instant land among the instant real estate owned by the Defendants for the purpose of cultivating the sexual seedlings and night tree, it can be said that the Defendants seek access to the surrounding land and prohibition of interference with passage.

Therefore, since the right to passage over surrounding land under Article 219 of the Civil Code limits the use of surrounding land for the purpose of using the land without a passage necessary for the original purpose between the public road and the public road, the scope of the right to passage should not be required for the person with the right to passage, but it should be recognized within the scope of the place and method where the damage to the surrounding land owner is the lowest. Ultimately, in light of social norms, the scope should be determined individually and objectively according to specific cases after taking into account the topography, locational shape and utilization relation of the land, surrounding land, neighboring land situation, and other various circumstances

(See Supreme Court Decision 2008Da75300 Decided June 1, 2009, etc.). However, considering the following circumstances, it is inappropriate to provide the instant dispute as stated in the Plaintiff’s claim for the passage from the forest land of this case owned by the Plaintiff to the contribution of this case, by taking into account the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by Eul to the evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including each number), Eul’s evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and Eul’s evidence Nos. 6, and the overall purport of pleadings as a result of the on-site inspection by this court:

① In other words, according to the results of the on-site inspection by the court and the records or images of the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and A No. 2-1, 2-4, respectively, and this Court.