1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim is dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) shall be attached to the attached Form 1,698 square meters, among the 1,698 square meters in Gangnam-si.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 3, 2015, the Plaintiff sold to the Defendant KRW 80 million a total of KRW 1698 square meters prior to Gangnam-si, Gangnam-si.

B. At the time, the Defendant consented to the use of a road of three meters wide in width in the right side of the C land (hereinafter “approval to use the land of this case”) to the Plaintiff. The part that the Defendant consented to the use of the road of this case is part of 105 square meters in the ship (hereinafter “instant land”) connected each point of the attached drawing Nos. 1, 2, 3, 7, and 1 in sequence among the land of this case (hereinafter “instant land”).

C. On May 12, 2016, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a certificate of content that the consent to land use was revoked on the ground that the instant land was not used as a road according to the written consent to land use, and that it reached the Plaintiff at his business.

[Reasons for Recognition] The entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the verification and appraisal result of this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff, even though the Defendant prepared a written consent to the land use of this case and ordered the Plaintiff to use the land of this case, sought confirmation that the Plaintiff had a indefinite right to use the land of this case.

B. As to the defendant, the defendant accepted the land of this case on the condition that the plaintiff needs to use it as a road to use the D land cultivated by himself. The plaintiff violated the condition, such as selling a direct water on the land of this case, and the use of the land of this case is unnecessary since the land of this case was already constructed a road capable of passing on both sides.

Therefore, the defendant revokes his/her consent to use the land of this case. The plaintiff's claim for consent to use the land of this case is without merit, and the plaintiff shall not enter the land of this case.

3. The Defendant’s consent to land use is temporary to use the instant land to the Plaintiff.