(a) 9,626,290 won and the rate of 15% per annum from September 12, 2018 to the date of complete payment.

A. In fact, the Plaintiff owned from around 1977 to July 12, 2018, the land of this case (hereinafter “instant land”). At the time of around 1983, the Plaintiff completed road packaging works at the request of village residents with respect to the portion of 423 square meters in the attached Form (a) of the instant land among the instant land, which is a non-packaged road used by village residents, among the instant land used by Kimpo-gun, the land of this case. The instant road is being used as a road for village residents up to the present date. The sum of rent for the instant road from January 1, 1990 to July 12, 2018 is KRW 9,626,290, monthly rent for the time of July 12, 2018, or the amount of rent for the 61,340 square meters as of July 12, 2018 is not disputed between the parties to the instant land, or the overall appraisal of the land of this case is acknowledged as a result of the appraisal of the appraisal by the Korea appraiser.

B. Determination of whether the State or a local government occupies a road can be divided into possession as a road management authority and possession as a de facto controlling entity. Thus, if the existing road is determined by the Road Act, or a road zone is constructed by the implementation of an urban planning project under the Urban Planning Act, possession as a road management authority may be recognized starting from the time of the existing road. However, even if a road is not established by the Road Act, if the State or a local government executes the reconstruction or maintenance of a road, such as expansion of the existing road, packing, or installation of sewerage system, and for the general public’s traffic, it shall be deemed that the existing road is under the de facto control of the State or a local government, and its possession as a de facto controlling entity is recognized (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 91Da35649, Oct. 27, 1992). According to the above recognition, according to the above facts, the Defendant’