1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs and the Defendants’ land ownership 1) The development of the East Cultural Industry Development Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff Company”).

[K] A member-gu K (hereinafter “K”) in Ansan-si.

(2) Defendant H is the owner of the land of T substitute 650 square meters, the land of the land of the Plaintiff, the land of the Plaintiff 2,858 square meters, the land of the Plaintiff 1,609 square meters, the land of the Plaintiff C, the land of the Plaintiff C, the land of the Plaintiff 849 square meters, the land of the P forest of the Plaintiff 92 square meters, the land of the Plaintiff E, the land of Q20 square meters, the land of the Plaintiff 635 square meters and the land of the Plaintiff, and the land of the Plaintiff F, the land of the Plaintiff 1,220 square meters, and the land of the instant land of the Plaintiff 1,620 square meters. (2) Defendant H is the owner of the land of T substitute 650 square meters and the land of the Plaintiff 9 square meters, the land of the

3) The status of the land owned by the Plaintiffs and Defendant H is as shown in the annexed Form 2. B. The Defendants, including the status of the use of the land of this case, were planting trees on the land of this case, and thus, only persons on the land of this case may move to the land of this case, but the vehicles are merely in a state that they cannot move to. 【The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, each entry in Gap’s 1, 2, and 3, Gap’s evidence Nos. 6, and Eul’s

2. Summary of parties' assertion on the issues of the instant case

A. Whether the major issue of the instant case is whether the Plaintiffs are admitted to the right to passage over the surrounding land

B. The gist of the plaintiffs' assertion 1 is that the land of this case is the nearest vehicle that is linked to their contributions from the land owned by the plaintiffs, and the plaintiffs are in need of the road passage of 4 meters wide that is connected to their contributions due to the terms and conditions of the building permit and living needs. The defendants also received the building permit on the premise that the land of this case is used as a road.

On the other hand, while there is “V” in addition to the instant land as a path that can be used in a contribution, V is far more distance than the instant road as a road consisting of 22 lots, a total of 3,296 square meters and a road consisting of land of 3,296 square meters, the owner is likely to obtain approval for land use by up to 24 persons, and the landowner is currently using the land.