1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Defendant) 1,475,280 won, respectively, to Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) A and E, and to Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) B, D, and F, respectively.

A principal lawsuit or counterclaim shall be deemed to be a same.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Of the lands listed in the separate sheet No. 1, the remaining 35,700/37,485 shares excluding J-owned shares 1,785/37,485 (hereinafter “instant lands”) were originally owned by the Plaintiffs (the shares of Plaintiffs A, E are 12,495/37,485, Plaintiff B, D, and F, each of which was 12,785/37,485, and 3,570/37,485, and the shares of Plaintiff C; the shares of Plaintiff C are 3,570/37,485, and the shares of Plaintiff H and I are 765/37,485, and the shares of Plaintiff H and I are 510/37,485, respectively). The Defendant acquired the instant lands from the Plaintiffs through consultation with the Plaintiffs for 64,734,860 won, and completed the registration of ownership transfer from November 1, 2014 to May 16.

B. The instant land had been occupied by the Defendant and used as a road for more than five years prior to November 26, 201, when the Plaintiffs filed the instant lawsuit from November 25, 2016, which was earlier than five years thereafter. From November 26, 2011, the amount equivalent to the rent for the instant land calculated from November 26, 201 to the date the Defendant acquired public land in the instant case from November 26, 201, is KRW 1,475,280 for each of the instant land, and KRW 210,510 for the Plaintiff’s portion, KRW 421,510 for the Plaintiff’s portion, KRW 93,010 for the Plaintiff’s portion, KRW 62,610 for the Plaintiff’s portion, and KRW 610 for the Plaintiff’s portion, respectively.

(Voluntary details are as shown in Appendix 2). [The grounds for recognition] [The fact that there is no dispute, each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (including virtual numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings.]

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Defendant used the instant land as a road without any title from November 26, 2011 to the date of acquiring consultations on the instant land. Since the Plaintiffs, co-owners of the instant land, are obligated to return to the Plaintiffs the unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent for the said occupation period, according to the share ownership ratio of the Plaintiffs, respectively, to Plaintiffs A and E, KRW 1,475,280, and KRW 210,750, respectively, to Plaintiffs B, D, and F, KRW 421,510, KRW 93,010, KRW 93,610, and KRW 62,610, respectively, and each of the said money to Plaintiffs H and I, as the Plaintiff seeks against the said money.