The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

. Facts of recognition.

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of each land indicated in the attached list (hereinafter “instant land”). The Defendant purchased the land of 1478 square meters in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun (hereinafter “instant land”) from Nonparty D and completed the registration of ownership transfer on June 15, 201.

C

B. The cadastral status of the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s land is as follows.

(*)The portion of the road in Ma-young is owned by the Republic of Korea with a size of 476 square meters on roads E in Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do; hereinafter referred to as the “instant road”).

C. In order to reach the land owned by the Defendant, the instant road is used as in the above forest. The instant road is packed with concrete, and among the land owned by the Plaintiff, the portion of “(2)” part of the instant road is 20 square meters (hereinafter “section(2)” connected in sequence with each point of 10 square meters in the attached Form 1, 8, 18, 17, and 1, among the land owned by the Plaintiff, connected in sequence with each point of 8, 9, 10, 10, 20, 19, 18, and 8, such as the area of “(1)” in the attached Form 1, 8, 17, and 1, among the land owned by the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, Gap evidence 4-1, 2-2, and the result of the survey and appraisal entrusted to the branch offices assigned to the Korea Land Information Corporation in this court, the result of the on-site inspection conducted by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion is narrow in the width of the above road in the course of entering his own land through the road of this case, and the part of the case (1) and (2) owned by the plaintiff is packed with concrete and used as the passage along the above road. The plaintiff is seeking the prohibition of passage through the part (1) and (2) of this case owned by the plaintiff as a claim for removal of interference based on ownership, and seek compensation of five million won due to mental damage suffered by the plaintiff due to the passage through the part (1) and (2) of this case.

3. The facts alleged in this Court, Gap evidence 4-1, 2, and Eul 1, 2.