1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) KRW 15,311,930 and interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from January 19, 2018 to the date of complete payment.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 13, 1983, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to B-road B 124 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On February 29, 1992, the land category of this case was changed from the previous forest land to the road.

C. From the time of the change of land category, the Defendant occupied and managed the instant land by providing it for the general public for traffic and passage.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1-1-3, Gap evidence 1-4 video, the purport of whole pleadings

2. Return of unjust enrichment:

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the defendant provided the land of this case as a passage to the general public and obtained profits from the use of the land of this case by occupying and using it, and thereby suffered damages equivalent to the same amount from the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant is obligated to return the rent amount equivalent to the rent amount of the land of this case to the plaintiff as the owner of this case.

B. First of all, the Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff did not raise any objection to the Defendant, even though he was aware that the instant land was used as a road site, and thus, the Plaintiff did not have any damage to the Plaintiff by waiver of the exclusive and exclusive rights to use the instant land.

The reasons why the land owner owns the land in question, in the case of interpreting that a private land is naturally created or is actually used as a road for public use in the general public, provided that the land is provided as a road by its owner to the neighboring residents or the general public for free, or that it is given a right to exclusively use and benefit from the land, or has waived its exclusive and exclusive right to use and benefit.