1. The defendant is against the plaintiffs:

(a) deliver 372 square meters of O forest in emulation;

B. A list of unjust enrichment in attached Form 1.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiffs are co-owners of the land of this case, and their shares and acquisition date are as stated in each corresponding column of the attached Table of unjust enrichment.

B. On July 3, 2007, the Defendant acquired the ownership of 10,802 square meters of PP factory site in the time of harmony adjacent to the instant land, and established and operated a factory on the said land.

C. Since August 8, 2007, the Defendant started the construction of the factory, it has occupied and used the instant land exclusively as a passage route.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 4, 7 through 9 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul's 3 and 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Since the Defendant without permission occupied and used the instant land owned by the Plaintiffs’ gist of the Plaintiffs’ claim, the Plaintiffs primarily seek to deliver the instant land to the Defendant and return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent corresponding to the Plaintiffs’ share.

Even if the possessor of the land of this case is not the defendant, the defendant without permission passes the land of this case. Thus, the plaintiffs, as preliminary, seek to prohibit the passage of the land of this case against the defendant.

3. Judgment on the main claim

A. According to the facts of the above recognition and the purport of the entire argument as to the cause of the claim, the defendant exclusively occupied and used the entire land of this case to gain profit equivalent to the rent, and suffered damage equivalent to the rent from the plaintiffs, who are co-owners of the land of this case. Thus, barring special circumstances, the defendant is obligated to deliver the land of this case to the plaintiffs and return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent corresponding to the plaintiffs' share.

B. The Defendant decided on the Defendant’s assertion 1: (a) decided to contribute the instant land at the time of harmony, subject to the approval of factory; and (b) established and publicly announced a plan for the installation of infrastructure for the instant land at the time of harmony.