1. The judgment of the court of first instance, including the Plaintiff’s claim for the main lawsuit extended and added in the trial room, is as follows.

1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the judgment on the facts of recognition and the claim for principal action are as follows: (a) installed “other structures” of the first instance judgment No. 6, No. 5, and No. 6, or replaced “the installation or planting of trees or other structures” with “the installation or planting of trees or other structures, or the last 7,000,000,000,000).

This part of the judgment of the court of first instance, with the exception of adding the judgment on the claim extended and added in the trial as follows, at the last seven pages, shall be cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for the part concerning the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, as follows. The part concerning the claim for indirect compulsory performance (1) shall be cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. The summary of the plaintiff's assertion is as follows: (2) If the defendant interferes with the passage of the passage of the road of this case, as an indirect compulsory performance, the plaintiff shall claim payment of money calculated at a rate of KRW 300,00 per day from the date of the violation to the date of removal of the violation. The second part of the judgment is a incidental debt, which is ordinarily possible only indirectly compulsory execution, and it is ordinarily possible to order the debtor to pay damages for non-performance in accordance with Article 261 of the Civil Execution Act after the establishment of executive title in the consultation procedure.