A. Co-owners may use and make profits from all the co-owners in proportion to their shares, and the matters concerning the management of the co-owned property are determined by a majority of co-owners' shares. Thus, if one of the co-owners exclusively occupies and uses the jointly-owned property without the consent of a majority of shares among the co-owners as to the method of use and profit, the other co-owners shall make unjust enrichment corresponding to their shares (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2000Da13948, Dec. 11, 2001; 2006Da49307, 49314, Nov. 24, 2006; 2006; 2006Da49314, Nov. 24, 2006; hereinafter the obligation to return unjust enrichment is indivisible as a return of profit, barring any special circumstance, where several persons jointly use the property of another person without any legal reason. An indivisible obligation is discharged from the other debtor with the performance of one of his/her obligations (see, 2.

The following facts are recognized by the parties to the dispute or by considering the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 2 (including paper numbers), and witness C's testimony.

1) The land and the 2nd floor building (hereinafter referred to as “instant real estate”) in the north-gu, Northern-si, Pohang-si.

(2) On November 21, 2002, the Plaintiff and F, who were their children, shared the share of 1/2 shares on November 21, 2002. Of them, on September 25, 2017, on the part of F, on the part of Defendant on September 18, 2017, the transfer registration of ownership was made for sale and purchase on September 25, 2017. (2) E and C, both South and North, and the Plaintiff’s mother, among the instant real estate, owned a right to collateral security (registration of April 8, 2014) with a maximum claim amount of KRW 250,00,000 for the Plaintiff’s share of KRW 1/2 of the instant real estate (registration of April 8, 2014), and on the part of the Defendant’s F share 1/2 as well as date of acquisition