1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

3. Paragraph 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance is "1."

1. The reasoning for the court's explanation of this case is as follows: "No. 6 national highways from the date of June 198 to the date of June 198, 190" of Section 2, Section 13 of the first instance court's judgment, "in order to have access" in Section 2, Section 18 of the second instance court's judgment, "in order to have access, from the date of June 198 to June 6, 198, it shall be added," and "in order to have access" in Section 2, Section 2, Section 3 to Section 5, Section 2 of the third instance court's judgment's reasoning is as stated in Section 5 to Section 5, Section 5, Section 2 of the second instance court's judgment, and the part shall be cited as it is in accordance with

A person shall be appointed.

2. Determination

A. We examine whether the right to passage over surrounding land is recognized or not, and the right to passage over surrounding land under Article 219 of the Civil Act, if there is no passage between a piece of land and a public road necessary for the use of the surrounding land, the owner of the surrounding land can not enter the public road at all without passing over or passing over the surrounding land, as well as the case where excessive cost is required.

Since the right to passage over surrounding land is limited to the use of the surrounding land for the use of the land without a passage necessary for the use of the land between the public road and the public road, the scope of the right to passage is not only necessary for the person having the right to passage, but also within the scope of the place and method where the owner of the surrounding land suffers the least possible damage. Ultimately, the scope should be determined according to a specific case after considering the topography, location, shape and use of the surrounding land in light of social norms, neighboring geographical features, surrounding geographic state, understanding of

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Da43580, Sept. 29, 195). With respect to the instant case, each description or image of health unit, facts acknowledged as above, evidence Nos. 1 through 10, 13, No. 13, 14, and 15 (including each serial number, if any), the result of the survey and appraisal conducted by the first instance court, and the Korea Land Information Corporation.