2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

A. On June 10, 2004, Plaintiff A sold 2/3 shares, and Plaintiff B sold 1/3 shares, in a voluntary auction procedure ( Changwon District Court D) with respect to the land of 873 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. From 1999, a road was naturally constructed since before 1982 on the part of 105 square meters (hereinafter “the part of the road in this case”) connected each point of the attached drawing Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 1 among the above land. However, the Defendant performed a concrete packaging business on the road in this case for the purpose of public work business and offered it to the general public for passage.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1-3, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 4, video, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to deliver the part of the road of this case to the plaintiffs, and to pay unjust enrichment due to possession of the part of the road of this case, unless there are special circumstances.

B. The defendant's defense 1) In light of the main purpose of the defendant's defense, the use status of the instant land and road parts, time and circumstances of the formation of the road, etc., the whole owner of the plaintiffs renounced the right to exclusive use and profit-making, and the plaintiffs who sold the instant land through an auction cannot exercise exclusive and exclusive use and profit-making rights on the instant road portion. Thus, the plaintiffs' claim is unjust. 2) In a case where a private land is naturally established from the previous land to the new road area or is actually used as a road for the public traffic, the owner of the relevant land directly provided the land as a road, thereby granting the neighboring residents or the general public the right to use and profit-making rights on such land.