1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of land, which is located in the same Ri, since all the land mentioned below, including the above land, is located in the same Ri at the time of residence. The indication of land is in the same manner as above.

B. The defendant is the owner of the land adjacent to the land E and D, and is the owner of the land newly constructed on the land C and is residing in the house.

C. The lower part of the land E is directly or in succession to F land, G land, H land, and I land (hereinafter “F”) and each of the said land is owned by J. D. The Plaintiff’s husband’s husband.

The plaintiff is operating an orchard in land, such as E and F.

(e)in order to enter a public road in E-land, land above the upper part of C and D land or F and other land above the lower part should be passed;

[Ground of Recognition] A without dispute; Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 3-1, 2, 6-1 through 5, 9-1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 3-1 through 6, 9, 10-1 through 3, 13-1, 2, 14, and 16; the result of the on-site inspection by this court;

2. The parties' assertion

A. The part on the claims in the Plaintiff C and D land and the part on the e-mail (hereinafter “instant passage”) are the only passage for the Plaintiff to enter the public road in E land.

The south side of the road asserted by the Defendant is far far far far more distance than the road in this case, and the vehicle cannot be opened.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s right to passage should be recognized, and the Defendant shall not perform all acts, such as installing obstacles that obstruct the Plaintiff’s passage, and shall pay KRW 100,000 per day to the Plaintiff in the event of violation.

B. The Plaintiff may enter a public road via land such as F, etc. located south of the land of Defendant E, and the above passage along the road.