However, the cases Appellants cite for this proposition pertain to licensees, not trespassers. See, e.g., Harbin v. Ritch, 876 S.E.2d 737, 739-40 (Ga.Ct.App. 2022); Sterchi Bros. Stores, Inc. v. Podhouser, 6 S.E.2d 92, 94-95 (Ga.Ct.App. 1939). And the railroad cases cited for this proposition involve individuals who were injured while using established pedestrian crossings-where "the general presence of trespassers habitually crossing at a particular spot is known to the railroad and has continued without the disapproval of the railroad."