The Plaintiff owns the land indicated in paragraph (1) of the attached Table 1 list (hereinafter “instant land”). The Defendant owns a building (the same as the building indicated in paragraph (2) of the attached Table 1; hereinafter “the instant building”) and its ground adjacent to the instant land. Of the instant land, the instant building is owned by the Defendant, in sequence, of the part (c) of the attached Table 25, 26, 24, and 25, connected in sequence to each point of the attached Table 25, 26, 25, and 21, 22, 20, and 21, 300 square meters (hereinafter “the part (c) of the instant building”) and the attached Table 21, 22, 20, and 21, and 300 square meters (hereinafter “the instant part (d)”) connected to the instant land, and each part of the instant building is owned by the Defendant 2, 300 square meters (hereinafter “the ground for recognition”), and the purport of the Plaintiff’s entire appraisal and sale of the instant part (3) of the instant building.

[] Since the Defendant permitted to use the instant land, the Defendant is obligated to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent for the instant part (b), the instant part (c), and the instant part (d). According to the facts of recognition of the claim for return of unjust enrichment on the site of a building, the Defendant obtained profit from the use of each of the instant parts among the instant land owned by the Plaintiff, by occupying and using the instant part (c), and the instant part (d). The Plaintiff suffered loss equivalent to the same amount.

I would like to say.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to return the amount equivalent to the above profits used to the plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

Furthermore, regarding the amount of unjust enrichment to be returned by the Defendants.