1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. Of the area of land for a factory in 1,653 square meters in Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City, the annexed map No. 1,19,18,26,25, shall be indicated.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the area of land for a factory of 1,653 square meters in Yongsan-gu, Manyang-si and the Defendant is the owner of the same area as that adjacent to the above land.

B. From April 28, 2006, the Defendant issued an order from April 28, 2006 to the land owned by the Plaintiff.

The steel container is installed on the ground of 17 square meters in part of the port (A) and the land of the part is occupied.

C. The sum of the rent for the period from April 28, 2006 to June 30, 2015, as mentioned above (A) is KRW 3,524,890, and the monthly rent for the period from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015 is KRW 40,630.

[Reasons for Recognition] The entry of Gap evidence 6, the survey and appraisal result of appraiser E, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to remove the steel container and deliver the above part of the land to the plaintiff.

In addition, the defendant is judged to have obtained profit equivalent to the rent by occupying and using the above part of the land, and thereby, caused damages to the plaintiff who is the owner. Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent, barring any special circumstance.

As to the scope of return of unjust enrichment, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 3,524,890 to the Plaintiff for the period from April 28, 2006 to June 30, 2015, and the monthly rent of KRW 40,630 after July 1, 2015 of the above part of land is ratified. Thus, the Defendant is ratified to the Plaintiff from July 1, 2015.

There is a duty to pay the amount of money calculated at the rate of 40,630 won per month by the completion date of delivery of the land mentioned in the paragraph.

B. The judgment on the Defendant’s assertion is unreasonable since the Defendant constructed a new building after undergoing the boundary surveying procedure through the Goyang branch of the Korea Cadastral Corporation, and later conducted a new survey again in the Korea Cadastral Corporation and the Defendant changed the results of the previous survey result, which affected the Plaintiff’s land.