1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The Defendants are to the Plaintiff:

(a) Attached appraisal among the lands listed in Attached List 1.

1. The reasoning for the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning this part is that "land within the fence is used as a dry field for planting crops, a building is constructed near the fence on the P land adjacent to the G land, which is a relatively close to the above fence," and that "The above court made a decision of dismissal on January 15, 2018, and the plaintiff filed an appeal and made a decision of dismissal on this part with "The appeal is still in progress (Seoul High Court 2018Ra20233)" and "the defendant was removed from or in the state of 3rd to 16 to 18" in the main sentence of Article 4 of the Civil Procedure Act, and "the ground for recognition" is as stated in paragraph (1) of the judgment of the court of first instance and Article 20 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination

(a) If there is no passage necessary for the use of the surrounding land between a piece of land and a public road, whether or not a traffic right is recognized, and the owner of the surrounding land is unable to enter the public road, or the cost to reach the public road is excessive, without passing over the surrounding land, if he/she does not use the surrounding land as a passage, he/she may pass over the surrounding land, and if necessary he/she may construct a passage;

(Article 219(1) of the Civil Act. Meanwhile, even if the right of passage over surrounding land under Article 219(1) of the Civil Act has already existed in an existing passage, it is recognized even in cases where it is inappropriate to use the pertinent land and thus has actually failed to function as a passage (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Da53469, Aug. 19, 2003).

However, the above evidence is recognized by comprehensively taking account of the evidence No. 49, No. 8 and No. 10, and the overall purport of the pleading and video.