1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. Of the size of 719-6 large 1695 square meters in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Gangseo-gu, 719-6 large 16.5 square meters, the attached drawings are indicated 9,8,5,6,9.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. On November 15, 197, the Plaintiff acquired ownership of approximately 719-6 and approximately 1695m2 (hereinafter “instant land”) in Gangseo-gu, Gangseo-gu, Seoul on November 15, 197. The Defendant, among the instant land, owned the structures installed on 10.3m2 in the ship (hereinafter “instant infringement land”) connected in sequence 9, 8, 5, 6, and 9 of the annexed drawings among the instant land, and the fact-finding and the determination that the Plaintiff owned the structures installed on the 10.3m3m2 (hereinafter “instant infringement land”) of the attached drawings. The Plaintiff and the Defendant did not dispute each other or the Defendant did not dispute with each other, and the entire purport of the Defendant’s written evidence No. 1 and the result of the court’s request for a survey appraisal by this court. According to the above fact-finding and judgment, according to the above

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to remove the above structure and deliver the land with the structure to the plaintiff, unless there are special circumstances. Therefore, this part of the plaintiff's assertion is with merit.

B. According to the facts and judgment acknowledged prior to the determination on the claim for return of unjust enrichment, the Defendant is obligated to return the amount equivalent to the rent for the use of the infringing land to the Plaintiff.

Furthermore, as to the scope of return, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant obtained unjust enrichment equivalent to the amount of KRW 34,360,456 [the annual rent = KRW 3,464,920 [the annual rent = KRW 69,298,400 [the annual officially announced price at the time when the instant lawsuit was filed 6,728,00 square meters x 10.3 square meters of the area of the instant infringed land] ¡¿ (5%) x (5%) x (the annual expected interest rate of KRW 6,728,00 at the time of filing the lawsuit of this case x 10.3 square meters of the area of the instant infringed land] x (Article 119/12). However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the basic price of the instant infringed land was identical to the aforementioned assertion during the remainder of the period excluding the time of filing the lawsuit of this case during the period of claiming the return of unjust enrichment.