Defendant Dolsan-gun shall be the Plaintiff:

A. Of the area of 258 square meters in the attached Form 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 1 among the areas of 258 square meters in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongbuk-gun.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff completed the registration of the transfer of ownership under the title No. 4519 of receipt on February 26, 2007 with respect to the area of 258 square meters in Cheongju District Court, Cheongju-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do.

Defendant B completed the registration of transfer of ownership on November 4, 2015 with respect to D large scale 684 square meters adjacent to the instant land (hereinafter referred to as “E Rister”) as the same registry office’s receipt No. 23106, Nov. 4, 2015.

(b) a narrow and long-term I land between D land, F land, G land, H land and C, which was the original ditch;

I Of the land I, the part on which the Defendant’s land was located to the JJ of Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, 2008, and used as a passage from surrounding land to J in 208 (hereinafter “road”). C.

C Of the land, the part 34 square meters per place of the ship connecting each point of the attached Form 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 1 (hereinafter “the part in dispute of this case”) among the land is included in the road of this case.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy Facts, Gap 1-4 evidence, Eul 1-2 evidence or images, Eul 1-2 evidence (including branch numbers), the court's commission of cadastral appraisal to the Korea Land Information Corporation, the purport of the whole pleadings, as a whole,

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. Defendant Tyun-gun, without any title in around 2008, has a duty to remove and deliver the concrete packaging of the part in the dispute in this case to the Plaintiff, as it occupies and uses the concrete as a road. As such, Defendant Tyun-gun, without any legal cause, obtained unjust benefits equivalent to the rent by occupying and using the part in the dispute in this case without any legal cause, and thereby suffered losses equivalent to the rent from the Plaintiff. Thus, since the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the part in the dispute in this case, the amount equivalent to the rent from January 2008 to the date of the loss of possession by Defendant Tyun-gun or the date of the loss of Plaintiff’s ownership is unjust gains or damages.