1. The part of the lawsuit in this case concerning the claim for confirmation of traffic right shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is one of the co-owners of the area of 757 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. B, 2,704 square meters prior to the Chungcheongbuk-gun (hereinafter “instant surrounding land”) is owned by Nonparty D, and the provisional registration of the right to claim transfer of ownership was completed with respect to the surrounding land in the Defendant’s name.

【Ground of recognition】 1-2 and 2-3 of the evidence No. 1-3

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The instant surrounding land is owned by the Defendant, and the Defendant trusted the ownership of the surrounding land to D.

The Plaintiff is the owner of the instant land, who is entitled to use the instant land.

나. 원고가 주위토지통행권의 확인을 구하는 이 사건 주위토지 중 별지 도면 표시 ㈎부분은 관습상의 도로가 있었던 곳인데, 피고가 이 사건 주위토지를 E공장에 임대하면서 위 관습상의 도로가 없어졌다.

C. The Plaintiff purchased the instant land as an idea to return to the Republic of Korea after retirement, and then planned to develop it as art galleries, public official training institutes, arboretums, etc.

The part for which the Plaintiff seeks confirmation of the right of passage over surrounding land is the land which is easy to access the land of this case on the secondary road.

Therefore, the defendant who is the land owner requests confirmation of the right of passage over surrounding land, prohibition of interference with passage, and transplantation of trees.

3. As to the legitimacy of the request for confirmation of the right of passage over surrounding land

A. We examine ex officio the lawfulness of the lawsuit seeking confirmation of the right of passage over surrounding land among the instant lawsuit.

B. The Plaintiff’s right of passage over surrounding land should be asserted against the owner of the surrounding land, who asserts his/her right of passage. Thus, barring any special circumstance, there is no benefit to file a lawsuit for confirmation against a third party, who is not the owner of

C. The evidence presented by the Plaintiff alone as to whether the surrounding land in this case is owned by the Defendant.