부당이득금
1. The judgment of the first instance, including the claims extended and added by this court, shall be modified as follows:
The defendant.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On March 6, 1975, the Plaintiff owned the land and occupied the land (1). The Plaintiff is the Plaintiff’s land B forest No. 4,315 square meters (hereinafter “land before partition”).
(C) 317 square meters prior to C (hereinafter “third land”).
(B) On November 7, 2016, the land prior to the subdivision is 1,729 square meters of land B (hereinafter referred to as “one parcel of land”) in Guri-si on November 7, 2016
2) The sum of the above 1,2, and 3 lands is “the instant land” and “the instant land”, both of which are 2,586 square meters and 2,586 square meters and 2,586 square meters and 2.
(2) Around 1970, prior to the Plaintiff’s acquisition of ownership of the instant land, neighboring residents have opened a road and used it as a road leading to a meritorious deed by opening a road on a 34mm2 in a ship, as indicated in the table No. 421m2 (hereinafter “road No. 1”; hereinafter “road”) No. 2, such as a list No. 421m2 in the attached Table No. 1, among the land before subdivisions, prior to the Plaintiff’s acquisition of ownership of the instant land.
3) Meanwhile, the Defendant from around 197 to around 1997, part 16 square meters in part 16 square meters in the “B” column 3 of the attached Table 1 list among the land Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (hereinafter “third road”), and the “instant road” in total of the roads Nos. 1, 2, and 3 above.
(B) The Plaintiff occupied and used the instant road since around that time, including the construction of cement packaging facilities, and the installation of water pipes on the roads 1 and 2, and the increase in water supply volume. (B) The occurrence of the dispute and the progress of the relevant case, on June 3, 2002, filed a claim against the Defendant for the removal of cement packaging and delivery of land, arguing that “the Defendant occupied the roads 1 and 2, etc. without legitimate title, the Defendant shall remove cement packaging on the ground of the roads 1 and 2 and deliver the roads 1 and 2.” However, the Plaintiff sought the return of unjust enrichment due to possession of the roads 1 and 2, separate from seeking the return of unjust enrichment by the Defendant.