1. The plaintiff's primary claim and the conjunctive claim are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 7, 1963, the Plaintiff’s father-E completed the registration of transfer of ownership based on sale with respect to the land F in Sacheon-si (hereinafter “the mother land of this case”).

B. On February 14, 1965, the land of this case was divided into 102 square meters in G-si, Sacheon-si, the road of this case (the same day was changed to a road), the road of this case (the same day was changed to a road), and the 988 square meters in H-si, Sacheon-si.

E on October 21, 1971, sold the above H land to I, and on March 5, 1981, sold the above G land to J respectively.

C. On January 17, 2011, the Plaintiff sent a certificate of return of unjust enrichment during the period of unauthorized occupation and the content of the instant road requiring the acceptance on the ground that the Defendant occupied the instant road without permission.

On January 31, 2011, the Defendant responded to the purport that “The land category of the instant road was changed to the road according to the need to open access roads due to the expansion of K Elementary School (the opening of June 1936). At the time of opening access roads, consultation on E and free use, compensation, etc. was presumed to have existed at the time of opening access roads, and there is no unjust enrichment to be returned to the Plaintiff due to the completion of the period of prescription for acquiring possession, and to review

The Plaintiff was donated the instant road from E on June 25, 2012, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on July 4, 2012.

E. The Defendant, a local government, occupies the instant road and provides it to the general public including neighboring residents from the past to the present.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 4 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 2-11, 12, 13, 4, and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, unless the defendant asserts and proves justifiable grounds that he/she can occupy and use the road of this case without any legal grounds, he/she obtains profit equivalent to the rent by occupying and using the road of this case, and thereby, causes damage equivalent to the same amount to the plaintiff who is the owner.