beta
Text
1. The defendant
A. Of the 1,59m2, the annexed drawings 1,17-20, and 1, each point in order.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is the owner of 1,599 square meters in Gyeongdong-gun (hereinafter “instant land”). The Defendant is the owner of 1,053 square meters in the D farm site adjacent to the said land.
B. Around 2004, the Defendant newly built a retaining wall in the vicinity of the above two parcels of land. A part of the instant land owned by the Plaintiff was built of a part of “bb” part 51 square meters in the text No. 1 of the instant land (hereinafter “b”).
C. The sum of annual rents from January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2017 pertaining to the land in dispute is KRW 133,416, and the annual rent in 2017 is KRW 18,768.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1-3, result of this court's request for survey appraisal, result of a request for rent appraisal, purport of whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts as to the cause of the claim, since the defendant newly constructed a retaining wall on the land in dispute and obstructed the exercise of the plaintiff's ownership on the land in question, the defendant is obligated to deliver the land in dispute to the plaintiff, remove part of the retaining wall constructed on the ground, and return the rent for the land in dispute by the completion date of delivery as well as unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent for the land in dispute.
B. As to the defendant's defense, the defendant's claim for the amount equivalent to the rent for the land in dispute is subject to the three-year short-term extinctive prescription, the part which occurred three years prior to the date of filing the lawsuit is proved to have expired by prescription
In light of the foregoing, the term “claim stipulated within one year’s short-term extinctive prescription under Article 163 subparag. 1 of the Civil Act” refers to a claim that is payable regularly for a period of less than one year (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 96Da25302, Sept. 20, 1996; 2005Da65821, Feb. 22, 2007). Since the claim for return of unjust enrichment claimed by the Plaintiff by a lawsuit is not a claim that is not payable regularly for a period of less than one year, the extinctive prescription period is ten years pursuant to Article 162(1) of the Civil Act.
(b).