부당이득금
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which partially accepted the part of the judgment, is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following “a supplementary or supplementary part,” and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 4
2. In addition or after addition, "each entry" at the last 6 pages 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be made with "each entry and trial witness testimony".
The following shall be added between the 5th and 14th of the judgment of the first instance:
The evidence Nos. 1 (Supplementary Evidence) submitted by the Defendant 1 is S, D’s children are L, L’s children are M, M’s children are the Plaintiffs, and M’s children are included in the judgment of the first instance court. The following is added between 18 and 19.
(1) No. 207Da79718 delivered on December 24, 2008, a person registered in the land survey book shall be deemed an owner of the land and shall be presumed to have become final and conclusive unless there is any counter-proof, such as that the content of the situation has been changed by the adjudication. The presumption of preservation of preservation of preservation of ownership is broken if a person other than the title holder of the preservation registration is found to have received the situation of the relevant land. On the other hand, in order to seek cancellation of preservation of ownership in another person's name, which is completed as part of the exercise of the claim for exclusion of interference with the real right based on the ownership of the real estate, the person must actively assert and prove that he/she has the title to file a claim for cancellation. If it is not recognized that there is such title, the registration of preservation of ownership in another person's name shall not be accepted (Supreme Court Decision 2007Da79718 delivered on December 24, 2008). The plaintiffs' claim for restitution of unjust enrichment, claim based on tort is all D owner of the instant land.