1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 5, 1976, the deceased D (the deceased on September 6, 1986; hereinafter “the deceased”) completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of sale on March 4, 1976. On September 2, 2016, the Plaintiff A completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of inheritance by agreement or division with respect to the instant land.

B. On September 2, 2016, Plaintiff B purchased the instant land from Plaintiff A, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the same day.

C. The Defendant, while managing the instant land as a road, occupied and used. The current status of the instant land is as indicated in the attached drawing.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, Eul evidence 3 and 4 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiffs asserted that the defendant occupied and used the land of this case as a road without lawful acquisition procedure, and the defendant asserts that the defendant is obligated to return unjust enrichment therefrom to the plaintiffs. Accordingly, the defendant allowed F or the deceased to use the land of this case as a road and renounced the exclusive exclusive use right. Since the plaintiffs acquired the land of this case with such a burden, they claim that the defendant did not have the duty to return unjust enrichment to the plaintiffs.

B. (1) The land owner owns the land in question in interpreting that it is intended to grant the right to free access to the land to neighboring residents or the general public by providing the land as a road, or to waive the exclusive and exclusive right to use the land, where the land in question is naturally occurring or is actually used as a road for public use in general.