1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 20, 2009, the Defendant entered into a sales contract with the purchase price of KRW 43.2 million calculated as KRW 1.2 million per square year on the instant land owned by the Pow association (=36 square year x 1.2 million). The Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant land due to this reason.

B. After the conclusion of the above contract, the Defendant conducted a survey on the instant land. As a result, the Defendant became aware that the part of the Section 40 square meters in the attached reference to the instant land, which connects each point of 9, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 9 in sequence, was used as the passage of neighboring residents along with the adjoining land.

C. Afterwards, the PListening Society agreed on the method to purchase the portion of the passage route of this case by dividing it, but did not reach a complete agreement.

On the line that connects each point of 9, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 of [Attachment Reference] around early 2014, the Defendant installed cement bricks and steel fences on the line that connects each point in sequence.

E. The Plaintiffs are the owners or occupants of adjacent land buildings in the instant land.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 5, and 8 through 14 (including the number of pages), the result of the on-site verification by this court, the result of the request for surveying and appraisal of the Korea Cadastral Corporation, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiffs’ assertion (1) is that the Plaintiffs have the right of passage over surrounding land under Article 219(1) of the Civil Act regarding the instant portion of the passage route.

(2) The Defendant’s interference with the passage of the Plaintiffs on the instant passage constitutes a tort or an abuse of rights.

B. The evidence presented by the plaintiffs as to the assertion of the right to passage over surrounding land alone requires that the access to the public service cannot be allowed or excessive costs should be borne unless the part regarding the passage from the plaintiffs' place of residence was not a passage.