1. The defendant

(a)payment of KRW 7,763,900;

B. From August 7, 2014, the area is 259 square meters or more of a road B in Geum-gu, Busan.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 15, 1912, the Plaintiff’s increased portion of land C was assessed against the Plaintiff’s 1,199 Pung-gu, Busan, Fung-gu. The land was divided into Fung-gu, Busan, and the land category was changed to both roads.

B. On April 13, 2012, the Plaintiff completed the registration of preservation of ownership with respect to the land of 1091 square meters for Si-gu, Geumcheon-gu, Busan (hereinafter referred to as “mamb land”). On June 19, 2012, the said land was divided into F road 430 square meters, and F road 430 square meters into B road 259 square meters on December 2, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”).

C. At the time of “Nompo-Yan River Construction Works” in 2003, the mother land was incorporated into a road after being publicly notified in the items of an implementation plan for an urban planning facility project as a state-owned land. The instant land is also used for public traffic as part of the road managed by the Defendant as of the date of closing argument since at least 2003.

The rent from January 7, 2009 to January 6, 2014 of the instant land is KRW 6,849,00, and the monthly rent from January 7, 2013 is KRW 130,700.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2 and 3 respectively, Eul evidence 1-1 and 2-2, the appraisal result of appraiser G, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. According to the above facts, it is reasonable to view that the land of this case is occupied by the defendant as the managing body of the road while maintaining and repairing the land as the managing body of the road and offering the general public for traffic. Thus, the defendant is obligated to return the amount equivalent to the rent to the

B. (See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da8914, Feb. 1, 2008).

Furthermore, as to the amount of unjust enrichment, there is no particular proof as to the construction time of the road to which the land of this case belongs, or the time when the land of this case was incorporated into the road, the land of this case was incorporated into the road around 2003, which was used as the answer.