1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

3. Judgment of the court of first instance No. 1-A

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 10, 2010, the Plaintiffs received donation of Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 471m2 (hereinafter “instant land”) and four-story neighborhood living facilities (hereinafter “instant building”) on the same day, and completed the registration of ownership transfer as to each of 1/4 shares on the same day.

B. On June 29, 1979, the urban planning line was set up in a 1.3m width from the boundary line on the cadastral road of the instant land in accordance with the F urban planning facilities (road) decision, etc. publicly announced by Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

As a result, around 190, the construction line was designated by leaving 1.3 meters from the boundary line on the cadastral road at the time of the construction deliberation and permission of the building of this case. The building of this case was newly constructed and the registration of ownership was completed on January 4, 1991 in the part of the land of this case except for the portion of 14.53 square meters among the land of this case (hereinafter “the report of this case”).

C. Roads (G) abutting on the instant report are the management authority of Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and the management is delegated to the defendant pursuant to the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Ordinance on the Management of Major Facilities, such as Roads.

On May 11, 2011, the Defendant established a road on the part adjacent to the instant report, and accordingly, the instant report is used as a delivery to the general public.

E. On October 1, 2012, from October 1 to December 31, 2017, rent for the instant news report is as listed below.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-4 evidence (including paper numbers), Eul 1, 2, 4, 9 evidence, the result of the appraisal commission of appraiser H by the court of first instance to the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, the fact inquiry results by the court of first instance to the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Since the defendant's assertion of the plaintiffs occupied and used the report of this case for the general public's passage, the defendant must return unjust enrichment, such as the purport of the claim, to the plaintiffs.

B. The Defendant’s assertion is an adjacent G appurtenances, which is the managing body of G, not the Defendant.