Prior to the sketch, there is a Bible as follows:
According to the Bible, the color green signifies a gardening or lawn, while a private yard is colorless or white.
A review of the ground floor drawings, while examining the areas with regard to the Bible, shows that in the rear apartments to which the backyards are attached, the private yard is not painted in color, and in addition, there is the inscription "Private Yard" (see the pointing arrow added by me):
On the other hand, the plaintiff's yard that is the subject of the dispute - the front, facing the Zarfi People's Boulevard, painted in green - which is special according to the Bible for a lawn or gardening - i.e., is not marked as a private yard (which is marked as aforesaid, without color) and it is not written that it is a private yard (see an arrow added by the one marking the yard):
More than necessary, and although the matter arises explicitly from a review of the drawings (and is also supported by Mr. Arad's testimony as expressed in paragraph 3 of the public servant's certificate) - I will note that when the appraiser on behalf of the plaintiff was asked to relate to the manner in which the yard physically adjacent to the plaintiff's apartment was marked in the permit drawing, he also admitted that the interpretation that this is a public area and not a private garden is possible. Thus, on page 32, lines 1-15, this witness testified as follows:
"The witness, Mr. Ziv: Sees a marked in bold of a private garden.
Adv. Galt: Of a private garden. Explain to me how it converges with the fact that in the Bible of this garmushka, no, but I asked you about the marking in green. First of all, you don't come in the right place. Let's talk about this place. It's the garden, it happens to be a private yard, what color, sir? No color, OK. And what color is the garden here? Okay, and what does it say here, green color? Landscaping and lawn, right? Gardening and lawn in this sketch mean private?
The witness, Mr. Ziv: Nope.