A. On September 17, 2009, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer based on the donation of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Road B (hereinafter “instant land”) on the same day.

B. From around 1987, the Defendant occupied and used the instant land as a road for the passage of ordinary vehicles and the general public.

C. On April 15, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming restitution of unjust enrichment against the Defendant by Seoul Eastern District Court 2014Kadan29286, and sentenced that “the Defendant would pay to the Plaintiff the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent, 33,766,760 won from April 24, 2012 to November 23, 2014, as the Plaintiff occupied and used the instant land, and delay damages therefrom,” the Plaintiff received money from the Defendant as the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 4, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination:

A. According to the fact that the obligation to return unjust enrichment was established, the Defendant obtained benefits by occupying and using the instant land without any legal ground and incurred losses to the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant land.

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to return the benefits accrued from the possession and use to March 23, 2017 sought by the Plaintiff from November 24, 2014, the following day after the date of calculating the unjust enrichment of the preceding judgment.

B. Furthermore, the scope of return of unjust enrichment, and the amount of profit from the possession and use of the real estate, barring any special circumstance, shall be the amount equivalent to the rent for the real estate. According to the appraiser C’s appraisal of rent for the land in this case from November 24, 2014 to November 23, 2015, 13,823,700 won, and 14,440,60 won from November 24, 2015 to November 23, 2016, and 24, 200,480 won from November 23, 2016 to November 23, 2016.

C. According to the theory of lawsuit, the defendant's total amount of unjust enrichment on the plaintiff 3,264.