1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)

A. The annexed drawing 1,2.2. of the area of 1249m2 in Daejeon Seo-gu C forest land.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 27, 1975, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the area of 1643 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”) prior to Daejeon Seodong-gu, Daejeon, Daejeon, on December 18, 1979, the Defendant completed each registration of ownership transfer with respect to the area of 1249 square meters (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”).

B. The Plaintiff’s land is not adjacent to the road, and can only pass through another adjacent land on the road.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap 1 to 6 evidence, result of on-site inspection by this court, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the main claim

A. The right of passage over surrounding land is particularly recognized at the risk of damage to the owner of the land under way for the public interest, which is the use of land without a passage necessary for its use between the public interest and the public interest. In determining the width, location, etc. of the passage road, the method of causing less damage to the owner of the land under way should be considered. In a specific case, the degree of necessity should be determined based on the geographical, location, and utilization of the land under ordinary social norms, neighboring geographical and locational features, neighboring geographical state, understanding of the users of the land under way, and all other relevant circumstances.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2008Da75300, 75317, 75324 Decided June 11, 2009, etc.) B.

In light of the above legal principles, in full view of the following circumstances revealed by the purport of the entire pleadings as a result of the request for appraisal to the Daejeon, the Daejeon District Headquarters of the Daejeon District Headquarters of the Korea Land and Information Corporation for the Daejeon District of Daejeon, Daejeon, the following circumstances, as to the instant case, it is reasonable to authorize the Plaintiff to have the right of passage over surrounding land relating to the portion (i) (ii) and 54 square meters in sequence connected to the Defendant’s land, among the following circumstances. As long as the Defendant is dissatisfied with the existence of the right of passage over surrounding land, it is reasonable to determine that the Plaintiff has the right of passage over surrounding land among the Defendant’s land, and as long as the Defendant is dissatisfied with the existence of the right of passage over surrounding land.

In addition, the defendant is also the defendant.