1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim and the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s counterclaim are dismissed, respectively.

2. Of the costs of lawsuit.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. The deceased D (the deceased on March 13, 2009, hereinafter “the deceased”) purchased Ma and F on February 12, 1971 and completed the registration of ownership transfer.

B. On August 24, 1971, the previous 284 square meters was divided from Masung-gun, Jeonsung-gun on the same day, and at the same time, the land category of B 284 square meters was changed to a road. On the same day, F was divided into 17 square meters prior to C, and at the same time, the land category of C previously 17 square meters was changed to a road.

C. On June 26, 2009, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on each of the instant land due to inheritance by agreement division.

The defendant, around 1970, opened a road on the land of this case by packing it as asphalt, etc., and thereafter offered it for the passage of general public and vehicles until now.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 1 to 3, video, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that, without any title, the Defendant gains profits equivalent to the profits from the occupation and use of each of the instant land owned by the Plaintiff as a road, and thus, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff money at the rate of KRW 66,20 per month from May 27, 2010 to December 31, 2015, which occurred from May 27, 2010 to December 31, 2015, and from January 1, 2016 to January 1, 2016, from the date the Defendant’s possession of each of the instant land is terminated or the Plaintiff loses its ownership.

B. Since the construction of the road as part of the Saemaeul Project around 1971, each of the instant lands alleged by the Defendant was offered for the passage of the general public and vehicles until now. The Deceased did not raise any objection to the use of each of the instant lands as a road. The Plaintiff, who succeeded to each of the instant lands, knew that each of the instant lands was used as a road for more than 40 years, and did not raise any objection thereto. The Plaintiff waived its exclusive right to use and benefit from each of the instant lands.

(2).