1. The defendant

A. As to Plaintiff A’s KRW 7,299,870 and its KRW 4,00,000 among them, the amount of KRW 7,29,870 from January 3, 2015 to KRW 3,29,870.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiffs owned or currently owned the area of 1498 square meters (hereinafter “instant land 1”) or 1609 square meters (hereinafter “instant land 2”) prior to Gwangju Nam-gu G (hereinafter “instant land”) as follows:

Plaintiff

A Shares owned on August 2, 2079 as of the date of the acquisition of land ownership x " 3/10 E" 〃 3/10 E 〃 3/10 x 1 on May 23, 2011 x 2005 of the instant land No. 1 B on August 20, 2079, May 27, 2008, 2005, August 1, 2005, 2008 x 1 C on October 22, 2005, 2005, x 13/10 x 10 x 2.

B. The Defendant, around December 31, 2012, removed the above transmission line around December 31, 2013, on the airspace above 482 square meters among the instant land and 377 square meters among the instant land.

C. On July 2, 2014, the Plaintiffs requested the Defendant to compensate for the use of part of each of the instant land as an advance.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 2, Eul evidence 3 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

(a) Where the owner of land is restricted from using the land by causing high-tension cable to pass over the airspace above the land on which the right to claim for return of unjust enrichment has arisen, the owner of the land may seek a return of the amount equivalent to the rent for the airspace above the airspace in which the use of the said cable is restricted, except in extenuating circumstances;

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Da58544 Decided January 15, 2009, and Supreme Court Decision 2005Da14083 Decided April 13, 2006). Examining the facts of recognition under paragraph (1) in light of the aforementioned legal principles, the Defendant is obligated to return the amount of unjust enrichment on the grounds that: (a) the Defendant installed the electric transmission line over part of each of the land of this case, and owned and managed it, thereby gaining profit equivalent to the rent for that part; and (b) the Plaintiffs suffered loss equivalent to the same amount.

B. The scope of the right to claim restitution of unjust enrichment is recognized by paragraph 11.