Whether the right of passage over surrounding land should be guaranteed to the extent necessary for the future building permit (negative)

Since the right to passage over the surrounding land is a right to restrict the exclusive right to use the surrounding land by the owner of the neighboring land and to coordinate the understanding between neighboring land owners, if it is possible to secure only a wide range of the damages to the owner of the surrounding land and to contribute to the transport of a certain size of goods, the right to passage over the surrounding land should be selected by the method of least the damage to the owner of the surrounding land. Furthermore, in preparation for the construction of the surrounding land in the future to the owner of the above-mentioned main point, it is not necessary to guarantee the passage

Article 219 of the Civil Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Han-sung, Attorneys Park Jae-young and 1 other, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)

Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Attorney Yoon In-bok, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Daegu District Court Decision 90Na4516,91Na436 decided Feb. 8, 1991

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below held that since the area of 602 square meters, which is owned by the plaintiff, belongs to a general residential area under the Urban Planning Act, but currently belongs to a general residential area under the Urban Planning Act, and all sides of which are not possible to pass through the surrounding land in order to go to a public road because it is filled out by another land owned by the defendant ( Address 2 omitted). The part of the judgment below on the above land, which is asserted by the plaintiff as the main claim, is not only three septic tanks and water supply facilities necessary for the defendant to use the 3rd floor building newly constructed by the defendant, and its part is newly installed along the wall and gate due to the main passage of the above building, and it is likely to cause enormous damage to the defendant if it is provided as a passage to the plaintiff, it can not be seen that the plaintiff's right to pass through the land is less than the above sub-paragraph (2) with a width of 1.5 meters, but it can not be determined by the misapprehension of legal principles and the part of the plaintiff's right to pass.

In theory, the plaintiff is scheduled to construct on the land above the future, and it is possible to obtain a building permit as the passage of 2.0 meters from the (b) section of the (c) section 1.5 meters recognized by the court below, so that it is possible to obtain a building permit, and thus, the right to passage over the surrounding land is a right to restrict the exclusive use right of the surrounding land owner for the land and to coordinate the understanding between neighboring land owners. Therefore, if it is possible to secure a large range of width to the extent that the person has access and transport some objects to the public, it is necessary to select the place and method where the damage to the surrounding land is the lowest, and further, it is not possible to accept this appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Jong-soo (Presiding Justice)