1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 5,440,140 as well as the annual interest rate of KRW 15% from September 7, 2016 to the date of complete payment.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on November 2, 1998 on the ground of inheritance on August 3, 1998 with respect to B-road B (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. The instant land is located on the middle-distance road of the fourth line incorporated into local highway C, and is being occupied by the Defendant and used for the traffic of the general public.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry or video of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, purport of whole pleadings

2. Establishment of claim for restitution of unjust enrichment

A. According to the above facts, insofar as the Defendant, as the possessor of the instant land, did not prove the existence of the source of possessory right, it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant obtained profits equivalent to the rent by occupying and using the instant land without any legal cause, and that the Plaintiff suffered losses equivalent to the same amount.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to return the benefits derived from March 1, 201, as sought by the Plaintiff, as a result of the acquisition date of ownership, to the Plaintiff. Furthermore, as long as the Defendant occupied the instant land from the date of closing the argument of the instant case until the date of closing the argument, but refused to return the unjust enrichment, the Plaintiff may file in advance a claim for unjust enrichment from the date of ending the occupation of the Defendant due

B. As to this, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff renounced the exclusive and exclusive right to use the instant land, including the Plaintiff’s objection against the use of the Defendant’s road, but the mere fact that the Plaintiff did not raise an objection against the use of the instant land as a road or demand payment of compensation, etc. does not necessarily mean that the Plaintiff renounced the right to use and benefit from the instant land, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Accordingly,

In addition, the defendant has up to now the land of this case.