1. The Defendant’s KRW 279,77,720 among the Plaintiff and KRW 44,414,100 among the Plaintiff, shall be KRW 40,170,330 from January 26, 2013.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 10, 1976, the Plaintiff was divided into B forest No. 40,450 square meters, B forest No. 42,446 square meters. On February 13, 2009, B forest No. 40,450 square meters, C forest No. 1,632 square meters, and D forest No. 364 square meters.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant land”) completed the registration of ownership transfer on the grounds of sale as to the 1/6 shares of the instant land, and thereafter became the entire owner of the instant land by purchasing the remaining 5/6 shares of the instant land from September 1985, and completing the registration of ownership transfer.

B. The location and shape of the land of this case are as shown in the annexed aerial photography, and the defendant has been installed on the land of this case from June 10, 2007 to the date of June 10, 2007 and used as facilities for military training by installing individual protection, traffic protection, vehicle signs, strings, etc. (hereinafter “military facilities of this case”).

C. The instant land is designated as a restricted protection zone under the Protection of Military Bases and Installations Act, and there are no buildings and other facilities.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1, 2, and 3 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The defendant, among the land of this case, obtained unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent without any legal ground by installing the military installation of the military installation of this case and occupying the whole part of the possession of this case without permission in the attached Form 2 (A) (hereinafter "the occupied part of this case"), and the plaintiff thereby suffered losses. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the money stated in the claim to the plaintiff.

B. The part of the Defendant’s possession of the instant military installation does not enable the Plaintiff to use and benefit from the entire possession of the instant military installation. Thus, the Defendant should be deemed to possess and use only the part in which the instant military installation was installed.

The instant land is a planned control area under Article 36(1)2 (c) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, and pursuant to the Protection of Military Bases and Installations Act.