1. In accordance with the claim for a change in exchange in this court, the Defendant indicated the attached Form 1 on the land of 390 square meters prior to Macheon-si.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Nonparty D received a successful bid on February 6, 2002 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on February 22, 2002.

B. D on May 10, 2002, part of the above E’s size of 947 square meters was sold to the Plaintiff by dividing it into 390 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”). The Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer as to the instant land on May 21, 2002.

C. The Defendant, as the owner of the F-Mincheon-si, the area adjacent to the instant land, uses a road installed on a ship (hereinafter “the instant road”) in the order of each point of Annex 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 1, which is part of the instant land, as a passage for having access to the said F-M land from the said land to the public road.

In the first instance trial, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against G, H, and I, other than the Defendant, against G, H, and I, which was using concrete on the instant road as a road. Moreover, G, H, and I, other than the Defendant, did not interfere with the Plaintiff’s exclusive possession, use, and profit-making of the instant road, and the decision of recommending reconciliation was confirmed or concluded by removing and restoring to their original state concrete that has been removed on the instant road.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry and image of Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including paper numbers), the result of on-site inspection by the court of first instance, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the road of this case is owned by the plaintiff, and the defendant interferes with the plaintiff's exercise of ownership by using the road of this case owned by the plaintiff. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated not to interfere with the plaintiff's ownership by using the road of this case as a passage.

B. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of right to passage over surrounding land (1) The Defendant’s assertion is the only passage to which the Defendant gains access to the road of this case.