The Defendant, as the Plaintiff

(a) KRW 8,586,358 and its related thereto, April 16, 2015

In addition to the following parts, the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

【Supplementary Use】

C. Next, with respect to the claim for unjust enrichment, profits gained by occupying and using land on the ground even if statutory superficies is the owner of the land shall be returned to the owner of the land. The officially announced land price (basic price) from 2008 to 2014 is either no dispute between the parties or may be known as the evidence No. 6. Thus, the result of calculating the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from April 21 to December 31, 2014 of the land indicated in the order by applying the expected interest rate of 2% per annum thereto is as follows.

(1) The Plaintiff asserted that the expected rate of the above land should be 3% per annum; however, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge the circumstance that the expected rate of the above land exceeds 2% per annum as recognized by the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that otherwise. The Defendant, as stated in the main sentence of 3.0,000 won in total, KRW 84,00 per annum, KRW 1,170 per year, KRW 170,126, KRW 360 per annum, KRW 84,000 per annum, KRW 86,00 per annum, KRW 36,00 per annum, KRW 85,00 per annum, KRW 36,00 per annum, KRW 86,00 per annum, KRW 1,179, KRW 912, KRW 876,000 per annum, KRW 224, KRW 648, KRW 208, KRW 708, KRW 1306,0816,05, KRW 36365,040.