A. From March 24, 2016 to Plaintiff A, KRW 382,08, KRW 1,354,392, and each of the said money.

A. On November 2, 1928, the registration of transfer of ownership in the name D was completed on November 2, 1928 with respect to the Daegu Metropolitan City, Daegu-gu 959 square meters.

B. The Plaintiffs received gift from D on February 17, 2002, and completed the registration of transfer of each share in the Plaintiff’s name as to the shares of 22/100 of the above land under the name of the Plaintiff and the remaining shares of 78/100 as to the shares of 22/10 of the above land under the registration of the Daegu District Court No. 11213, Mar. 9, 2004.

C. Out of the above land, the part 61m2 (b) part 61m2 (hereinafter “instant land”) connected in order to each point of the attached map Nos. 15, 16, 17, 23, 24, 25, 20, 21, 22, and 15 among the above land was used as part of a road entering a village from the nearby meritorious service in 1973 and the adjacent land connected thereto was used as a part of a road entering a village from the neighboring meritorious service. The Defendant performed a business packaging the instant land for the convenience of residents around 1990, and on April 10, 206, publicly announced a road construction plan with a width of 10m3m2 in the Dong-gu, Daegu Metropolitan City E-gu, Seoul.

At present, the land of this case is being used as a passage leading to the village from neighboring residents and the general public to the village.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 1 to 7, the result of the survey and appraisal by the National Land Geographical Board, the result of the on-site inspection by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiffs' assertion that the defendant obtained profits from the use of the instant land by occupying and using the instant land as a road without any legal ground, and thereby causes damage equivalent to the same amount to the plaintiffs who are the owners of the instant land. Thus, since the commencement date of occupation of the instant land and the plaintiffs owned the instant land from January 14, 2010 to January 15, 2015 for which the plaintiffs sought, unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent gained by occupying and using the instant land from January 16, 2015, and the expiry date of occupation or the plaintiffs' right to occupy from January 16, 2015.