1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff cultivated the said land as the owner of 1498 square meters in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”).

The Defendant is the owner of Ulsan-gun C, Ulsan-gun, the neighboring land of which is 1096 square meters (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”).

B. The road from Ulsan-gun E to the Plaintiff’s land is located near the entrance of the road, and approximately 12 square meters of the part inside the ship connecting each point of the Defendant’s land with the indication of the attached drawing Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 (hereinafter “instant dispute”).

C. The plaintiff has used the dispute part of this case with the consent of the defendant. The plaintiff packaged cement on the road leading to the plaintiff's land, including the dispute part of this case.

Accordingly, the defendant set up enormous and net in the line that connects each point of the attached Form 1, 2, 3, and 4 among the dispute areas of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 2-2, Gap evidence 3-1-4, on-site inspection result, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. The Plaintiff’s land asserted by the Plaintiff cannot be on the above road without passing through the Defendant’s land, and it cannot be said that the Plaintiff’s land did not use the part of the dispute in this case, without passing through the Defendant’s land.

Therefore, the Plaintiff has access to the dispute of this case in accordance with the agreement with the Defendant or the Civil Act.

B. The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize the existence of an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant as to the passage of the dispute of this case.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the evidence mentioned above, evidence No. 2, evidence No. 3-1 to No. 5 of No. 3, it is recognized that there exists a road on the part of the Plaintiff’s land and a road on the opposite direction to the dispute of this case, and the width of the road except the dispute portion of this case’s agricultural machinery cannot pass, but it is recognized that the person can pass through.

In light of these facts of recognition, the defendant raises objection to the plaintiff.