All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Where a landowner provides the land owned for public use, such as a road and a site laid underground, the following circumstances are comprehensively considered: (a) the owner of the land; (b) the details and period of holding the land; (c) the details and scale of the owner’s provision of the land for public use; (d) the interest or convenience of the owner of the land; (c) the location or form of the relevant part; (d) the relationship with the neighboring land; and (e) the comparison and balancing between the ownership guarantee of the landowner and the public interest; and (d) if the owner may be deemed to waive the exclusive exclusive use right of the land, the third party (the State and the local government may also correspond thereto; hereinafter

Even if there are no special circumstances, the land owner cannot be deemed to have suffered any loss due to the land owner’s failure to file a claim for return of unjust enrichment against the land owner.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2016Da264556 Decided January 24, 2019). A person who specifically succeeds to the ownership of land, the exercise of exclusive use right of which is restricted by the original owner, by auction, sale, payment in substitutes, etc., shall be deemed to have acquired the ownership of the land, even though he/she was aware of the burden of restricting such use and profit-making, barring any special circumstance. Therefore, such specific successor is prohibited from exercising the exclusive and exclusive use right of the land.

(see Supreme Court Decision 2011Da63055, Nov. 14, 2013). Restrictions on the exercise of exclusive right to use by landowners are premised on public interest due to the provision of the relevant land to the general public. Thus, land owners provide the relevant land for public purposes.