logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원안동지원 2020.01.22 2019가단22104
통행금지등 청구의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On October 20, 2017, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on each of the instant land.

B. Each of the instant lands is assigned to the access road to the F Village when permanent residence, and is used by the general public.

(See Attached G Guidance). / [Ground] Evidence Nos. 9, 10, 3, and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Determination

A. On July 3, 2017, the Plaintiff’s family member asserted that he/she purchased H land and its ground at permanent residence, and resides therein.

The land is adjacent to the above land and there are 168 square meters of I road in the permanent residence of Defendant B, and the above I land is used as a passage to enter the above H land and the above land, and was used as a passage to the general public.

However, the defendants, a couple's death, installed a steel fence on the boundary of the above I land and H land, thereby obstructing the plaintiff's access to the housing and impairing the landscape of the housing.

Since the Defendants were unable to use the said I land without any reason, the Plaintiff also has the right to prevent the Defendants from using each of the instant land.

In addition, since each of the instant lands is the Plaintiff’s private land, the Defendants should not use or pass through each of the instant lands, and if they are violated, they should pay 100,000 won per each of the instant offenses to the Plaintiff.

B. In light of the following circumstances, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants for prohibition of passage to each of the instant land constitutes an abuse of right, and the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

① Each of the instant lands constituted part of a road that was offered to the general public for traffic, but the Plaintiff knowingly acquired each of the instant lands.

② The Plaintiff is seeking a prohibition of passage only from among the persons using each of the instant land, and the Defendants are forced to use each of the instant land.

arrow