A. On September 17, 2009, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership 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 June 21, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for return of unjust enrichment (Seoul Central District Court Decision 201Da254903), and rendered a judgment ordering the Defendant to pay the Plaintiff the amount of unjust enrichment and interest equivalent to the rent due to the possession and use of the instant land from September 17, 2009 to April 23, 2012, and received money from the Defendant.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

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 arising from the possession and use to November 23, 2014 that the plaintiff seeks from April 24, 2012 to the plaintiff, barring any special circumstance.

B. Furthermore, the scope of unjust enrichment, and the amount of profit from the possession and use of the real estate, unless there are special circumstances, shall be the amount equivalent to the rent for the real estate. According to the appraiser C’s appraisal result, the rent for the land in this case shall be 12,730,160 won from April 24, 2012 to April 23, 2013, and 13,038,60 won from April 24, 2013 to April 23, 2014, and from April 24, 2014 to April 23, 2014.

3. If so, the Defendant, from April 24, 2012 to November 23, 2014, 33,766,760 won =12,730,160 won +13,038,60 won +60 won +7.