부당이득금반환
1. The judgment of the first instance, including any claims extended and added in the trial, shall be modified as follows:
1. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is the same as the entry of "1. Facts recognized" among the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, they are quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. The Defendant’s obligation to return unjust enrichment (1) where the State or a local government occupied and occupied by the State or a local government, and thus, the owner’s exclusive and exclusive use of and benefit from the land is restricted, barring special circumstances, such as where the owner renounced his/her exclusive and exclusive use of and benefit from the land, the State or a local government shall be deemed to have obtained gains from occupying and using and benefit from the land, and the owner of the land shall be deemed to have suffered considerable damages (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da8914, Feb. 1, 2008). According to the above basic facts, the Defendant’s land category as the managing body of the road from February 29, 1969, the land category of the instant land was changed to “road,” and thus, it constitutes the Plaintiff’s obligation to return the amount equivalent to the fees to the Plaintiff’s unjust enrichment.) The Defendant’s assertion on the waiver of the Defendant’s exclusive use of and benefit from this part of the Civil Procedure Act as stated in its reasoning.
B. The basic price of the land to calculate the amount of unjust enrichment to be returned to the owner of the land without title by a person who occupies another person’s land without title, which serves as the basis for calculating the scope of return of unjust enrichment, shall be assessed based on the actual conditions of use at the time when the possessor commences possession.