1. The defendant,

A. Plaintiff A: KRW 3,396,162; KRW 4,528,216; KRW 1,132,054; Plaintiff D, E.

1. Basic facts

A. The network H completed the registration of ownership transfer on August 16, 1978 with respect to the land listed in the Disposition No. 1 (hereinafter “instant land”) on the ground of sale on July 20, 1978.

After that, with respect to the instant land, Plaintiff A completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 27, 2017, on November 19, 1990, with respect to Plaintiff A’s share 27/90; Plaintiff B’s share 36/90; Plaintiff C’s share 9/90; Plaintiff D, E, and F’s share 6/90, respectively.

B. The first land category was changed to “road” on October 8, 1980, and is currently being used as a road until now.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Return of unjust enrichment:

A. According to the facts of recognition of the obligation to return unjust enrichment, the Defendant provided each of the instant land as a passage to the general public, obtained profits by occupying and using it, and thereby suffered losses to the Plaintiffs. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to return unjust enrichment from the possession and use of the instant land to the Plaintiffs, the owner of the instant land, barring special circumstances.

B. The Defendant asserts that the acquisition by prescription 1 as to the Defendant’s assertion was completed as the acquisition by prescription was completed as the land of this case was preserved, openly and openly managed and occupied on the road for a long time.

If the nature of the source of possessory right of real estate is not clear, the possessor shall be presumed to have occupied in good faith, peace and public performance with the intention of ownership pursuant to Article 197(1) of the Civil Act, and such presumption shall also apply to cases where the State or a local government, which is the managing body

However, it is proved that the possessor occupied the real estate owned by another person without permission, even though he/she is well aware of the absence of such legal requirements without any legal act or any other legal requirements which may cause the acquisition of ownership at the time of the commencement of possession.