A. On August 18, 2004, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on August 3, 2004 under the name of the Plaintiff on August 3, 2004, with respect to the share of 7864593/786450, among the 25,686 square meters of forest B and C forest and C forest and 78,645 square meters of forest and C forest.

B. Meanwhile, on April 11, 1986, the Defendant: (a) executed land expropriation by specifying 46 square meters of the steel tower site among the above C forest land; and (b) registered the ownership transfer for 457/7/7 of the above C forest land under its name without undergoing the land division procedure; (c) thereafter, divided the above steel tower site into D.

C. The Defendant, prior to the Plaintiff’s acquisition of ownership of each of the above lands, installed a power transmission line over part of each of the above lands over the airspace, and owned and managed it. The area of the instant land is 59m2, and the area of the land not on the line of land B is 4,378m2, which is 4,378m2.

On May 20, 2014, the Defendant entered into a contract to establish a divided superficies with the term of the contract for the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s each of the above vessels up to the term of the above transmission line, and completed the registration of divided superficies.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 4 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. 1) In the event a landowner becomes restricted from using the airspace above the land by passing through a high voltage cable over the airspace above the land, barring any special circumstance, the landowner may seek the return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent for the airspace above the airspace over which the use of the said cable is restricted. In such cases, where the airspace above the airspace passing through the high voltage cable and the relevant statutes stipulate that a certain distance between the high voltage cable and the structure shall be maintained, the airspace above the airspace within the distance may be deemed limited (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2007Da58544, Jan. 15, 2009; 2007Da58544, Apr. 13, 2006).