logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원홍성지원 2017.09.27 2016가단10155
주위토지통행권확인
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs shared 1/3 shares of each of 38,200 square meters of forests and fields E, Hongsung-gun, Hongsung-gun (hereinafter “Duri”), respectively.

B. On May 29, 2008, the Defendant was to create a F Park in the vicinity of the E forest. Accordingly, the E forest was divided into 38,200 square meters of G forest land into 7,370 square meters of G forest land, and 30,830 square meters of H forest land. Of 30,830 square meters of H forest land, the Plaintiffs’ share (each 1/3) among 30,830 square meters of H forest land was completed on May 28, 2008 due to the acquisition of public land in the Defendant’s name.

C. From around 2008 to 2009, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of a public site’s acquisition with respect to 698 square meters of I forest near H forest, J forest 92 square meters, and 4,104 square meters of K forest.

Plaintiff

C has formulated a new construction plan in G forest land and completed the preparation of an application for permission for development activities, an application for permission for mountainous district conversion and an application for a building permit on April 2017, but it has not been able to secure access roads of at least four meters in width in accordance with the relevant laws and regulations.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 7, 9 evidence, Eul evidence 1 to 4 (including branch numbers for those with serial numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The E forest land, which is the land before the Plaintiffs’ assertion was divided, was difficult to be free from access to the public road due to connection with the local L with the land. However, the land owned by the Defendant should only be passed to access the land to the public road in G forest as the said forest land was divided according to the F Park creation project.

The plaintiffs are preparing to build new houses in G forest land owned by the plaintiffs, and if they intend to obtain a building permit to build new houses under relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, access roads at least 4 meters in width should be secured to enter a public road.

Therefore, in order to minimize the damage of the Defendant, the Plaintiffs claim against the Defendant, the landowner.

arrow