1. The plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed.

2. The plaintiffs' preliminary claims added by this court are dismissed.

3...

1. Basic facts

A. Of the land listed in the attached list (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”), the Plaintiffs completed the registration of transfer of ownership from Nonparty D on April 8, 2010 as to the land of 106 square meters of the Sinyang-gu C road (hereinafter “I”), Ansan-si, Ansan-si, for sale and purchase on April 8, 2010. The Plaintiffs completed the registration of transfer of ownership as to the land of 254 square meters of the Sinyang-gu E road (hereinafter “J”) from Nonparty F on April 8, 2010. The Plaintiffs completed the registration of transfer of ownership as to the land of 254 square meters of the Sinyang-gu, Ansan-si, Ansan-si, Annyang-si, for sale and purchase from Nonparty F on April 8, 2010.

(The shares in each of the lands in this case are 5/10, 3/10, 2/10, and 2/10). (The shares in each of the lands in this case are stock companies.)

Each of the instant land, the original land category of which was “the answer”, was determined as Kroyang Urban Planning Facilities (Road) announced by Gyeonggi-do on September 26, 1975, and was divided from each mother’s land before subdivision on September 20, 1984, and the land category was changed to a road on September 24, 1984, and has been used as a road until now.

[Ground of Recognition] Unstrifed Facts, Gap evidence 2 and 4 (including additional number)

2. The parties' assertion

A. Mainly, the plaintiffs' assertion is that the defendant occupies and uses each of the lands of this case owned by the plaintiffs as a road, and thus, the defendant is obligated to return the unjust enrichment.

Preliminaryly, the Defendant is obligated to deliver each of the instant lands to the Plaintiffs.

The Plaintiff did not waive the exclusive right to use and benefit from each land of this case, and even if the Plaintiff renounced it, it was merely an obligatory waiver against the Defendant, i.e., a loan agreement with the Defendant, and thus, was terminated according to the Plaintiffs’ declaration of termination or significant changes in the situation of land use.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that each of the instant lands is used as a road and thus is subject to restrictions on the use and profit-making thereof. As such, the Plaintiffs are entitled to exclusive use and profit-making right of each of the instant lands.