A. On March 5, 1985, the Plaintiff purchased 8,311 square meters (hereinafter “land before subdivision”) prior to Gangseo-gun C, Gangwon-do, Gangwon-do, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 18, 1985.

B. On November 2, 2017, the land before subdivision was divided into 5,774 square meters and 2,537 square meters before D (hereinafter “D land”).

C. On April 11, 2018, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer based on a consultation on public land as to D land, and the Plaintiff was paid KRW 112,896,50 with the purchase price.

On the other hand, the Defendant around 1974 performed the construction of F reservoir (hereinafter “instant reservoir”) in the E-ri-ri-ri, Gangwon-do. Of D land, part of D land was incorporated into the site of the instant reservoir in the process of constructing the said reservoir.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 4, 5, and 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Return of unjust enrichment:

(a) A part of the land which constitutes a reservoir generally judged on the cause of the claim is possessed by the owner and manager of the reservoir;

(See Supreme Court Decision 95Da2074 delivered on July 28, 1995). According to the above facts, the defendant, as the owner of the reservoir of this case, is obligated to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent to the plaintiff, unless there are special circumstances, since the defendant, as the owner of the reservoir of this case, has occupied, used and profit from the occupied part of this case incorporated into the site of the reservoir of this case. The defendant obtained profit equivalent to the rent and suffered loss to the plaintiff, who was the owner of the possessed part of this case.

The Plaintiff asserted that the entire area of 2,537 square meters of land D was incorporated into the site of the instant reservoir, but it is not sufficient to recognize the inclusion of the evidence Nos. 2 and 5 alone, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, it is true.