1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 18, 1972, the Plaintiff purchased 825 square meters prior to Jeju-si D prior to D, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the same day.

B. On July 7, 1989, the instant land was divided from the land before subdivision, and on November 30, 1990, the land category of the instant land was changed to a road on its land cadastre.

C. Around that time, the instant land was incorporated into the E Library Access Road Construction Project, and the road package construction was implemented, and the Defendant has occupied and managed the instant land as a road until now.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7 (including additional evidence), Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of claim, the defendant is obligated to return unjust enrichment from the possession and use of the land of this case to the plaintiff, who is the owner of the land of this case, inasmuch as the defendant obtained profit by occupying and using the land of this case as the method of providing it for the general public’s passage, and thereby inflicted loss on the plaintiff, barring special circumstances.

B. Determination 1 on the Defendant’s assertion on the completion of the prescriptive acquisition by prescription is presumed to have been occupied in good faith, peace, and public performance with the intention of ownership (Article 197(1) of the Civil Act), and thus, in principle, the possessor is not liable for proving that he/she occupied as his/her own intent at the time of claiming the prescriptive acquisition, and rather, bears the burden of proof by a person who seeks to deny the establishment of the prescriptive acquisition by asserting that he/she

However, it is not determined by the internal deliberation of the possessor, but by the intention of the possessor, in view of the nature of the title that was the cause of the acquisition of possession or all the circumstances related to the possession, the possessor should be determined objectively and objectively. Thus, at the time of commencement of the possession.