(a) KRW 9,652,00 and interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from September 27, 2017 to the date of complete payment.

A. A. On January 30, 1980, the land category B was changed to a river on February 4, 1980, when C/C was divided into 73 square meters in the field of 2,284 square meters in Gyeonggi-gun, Gyeonggi-do.

On February 13, 1981, the category of D land was changed to a bank, as D river was divided into a size of 535 square meters from B river 2211 square meters.

B. On April 10, 1998, the land indicated in paragraph (1) of the attached Table (hereinafter referred to as “each land of this case” in the attached Table 1; and the land indicated in paragraph (1) of the attached Table 1 as “instant land”; C 73 square meters in the attached Table 73 square meters in the land of this case was changed to the area of each administrative jurisdiction on the land of 73 square meters in the area of the area E in the area of the land of the Si/Man-si

On June 13, 2003, the land Nos. 2 and 3 of this case was divided, respectively.

C. On January 31, 1990, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of inheritance by consultation and division on January 13, 1975 with respect to each of the instant land.

On February 19, 1988, the land of this case was incorporated into the river section of G which is a local river according to the public announcement of the basic plan for river maintenance (the Gyeonggi-do public announcement F) by the Gyeonggi-do Governor.

Meanwhile, since 2011, each of the instant lands has been used as the site of the national map H, and the Defendant performed the construction of the road package.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 3, 5 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1, and each fact inquiry to the Gyeonggi-do Governor of this court, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Return of unjust enrichment:

A. 1) The plaintiff defendant, without the plaintiff's consent, opened, occupied, and used a road without permission. Thus, the defendant is obligated to return the amount equivalent to the rent of each land of this case to the plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

B. The land of this case by Defendant 1 is a river management agency of Gyeonggi-do, which is a river management agency, and it cannot be deemed that the Defendant occupied it, and the Plaintiff was legally incorporated into a river area.