A. Plaintiff A, 4,63,099, Plaintiff F, and C, respectively, KRW 3,418,607, and Plaintiff D 1,54,366, respectively.

A. On April 27, 1983, the Plaintiffs completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of property inheritance with respect to G river 262 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”). At present, the Plaintiffs owned shares of 110.1818/496, Plaintiff A, Plaintiff B, and C, respectively, 80.8/496, Plaintiff D’s 36.727/496, and Plaintiff E owned shares of 14.69091/496.

B. The Defendant packaging the instant land into a road and offered it for the general public to pass.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap's evidence 1 to Gap's evidence 6, purport of whole pleading

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is virtually in possession of the instant land as a dominant body by providing the instant land packaged as a road and for the passage of the general public, and by occupying and using it, gains a profit equivalent to the said rent and thereby causes damage to the Plaintiffs. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to return the rent from January 27, 2012 to May 31, 2017, and the rent from June 1, 2017 to the date of the Defendant’s possession or the date of loss of the Plaintiffs’ ownership.

With respect to the scope of unjust enrichment, facts constituting 20,91,648 won for rent from January 27, 2012 to May 31, 2017, and facts constituting 327,107 for actual monthly rent after June 1, 2017 do not conflict between the parties. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant: (i) 4,663,099 won for Plaintiff A (20,91,648 won x less than KRW 110.18/496, less than KRW 110.18/496; hereinafter the same shall apply); (ii) 3,418,607 won for Plaintiff F and C (=20,91,648 won x 80.8/496); and (iii) 1,54,369, 297; (iv) x 2696.467,2967; (iv) the Plaintiff’s claim for rent from Plaintiff 15,64696.7