1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an owner of a 337 square meters road B in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. The land of this case was originally divided into the 758 square meters (hereinafter “the mother land of this case”), which was originally owned by C, and the administrative district of the above land was Gyeonggi-gun E, Gyeonggi-do, Seoul, and was changed to F and Dobong-gu, Seoul, and was changed to F.). The mother land of this case was divided into the 880 square meters (Seoul, Gangnam-gu, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, and the Mano land of this case was divided into 880 square meters.

C. C: (a) around 1957, after acquiring the above G 880 square meters, divided the land of this case from the above G on July 24, 1964; (b) on March 9, 1974, dividing 124 square meters out of the mother land of this case into H; and (c) on April 4, 1974, the remaining 634 square meters out of the mother land of this case divided into 14 lots, including the land of this case, and the parcel number of J was successively set from D large 36 square meters and I.

From among the lands divided from the mother land of this case, the remaining lands except the land of this case and H were newly constructed in order by the owner of the land purchased by dividing it to a third party. The land of this case was changed to a road on April 4, 1974, and it remains owned by C until the Plaintiff acquired ownership on May 15, 2007.

[Reasons for Recognition] The descriptions and images of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. The Defendant is obligated to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent to the Plaintiff, as the Plaintiff gains from the rent without any legal ground by constructing a road and providing it to the public for possession and management of the land of this case, which is owned by the Plaintiff without undergoing compensation procedures.

B. The Plaintiff, with the knowledge of this, renounced the right to use and benefit from the instant land by dividing the instant land owned by Defendant C and providing the instant land as a passage leading to a contribution. The Plaintiff also acquired the instant land.