beta
Text
All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The instant land was purchased on April 30, 1962 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on December 30, 1980. Thereafter, E purchased from D on July 18, 2009 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on September 30, 2009. In other words, the Plaintiffs purchased from E on October 27, 2015 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on November 26, 2015.
B. Of the instant land, the instant road portion has been used as part of the “F Village Development Road” that had been passed by village residents in a non- packing state from the past. At around 1980, village residents requested the Defendant to pack the “F Village Development Road” as part of the Saemaul Project, the Defendant performed the packing work on the “F Village Development Road” including the instant road portion, and D consented thereto at the time of the first packaging and subsequent repair of the instant road portion by the Defendant.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence of Nos. 1 through 5 (including concurrent numbers), Eul evidence of No. 1 to 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim
A. According to the above facts finding as to the plaintiff's cause of action, the defendant has been in fact in possession of the road part of this case since 1980. Thus, barring any special circumstances, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiffs unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent due to possession of the road part of this case from November 26, 2015, which is the date of acquiring the plaintiffs' ownership of the road part of this case from November 26, 2015 to the date of closing the road or losing the plaintiffs' ownership.
B. As to the judgment on the Defendant’s claim for the acquisition by prescription, the Defendant occupied the road portion of this case from around 1980 to at least 20 years as the intention of ownership, and the acquisition by prescription has been completed around 200, and thus, there is a legitimate possessor of the right to possess the road portion of this case.