1. The Defendant is the Plaintiff with respect to the amount of KRW 641,410 and KRW 27 square meters from October 17, 2017, Gangwon-gun, Gangwon-gun, Gangwon-do.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 15, 2016, the Plaintiff acquired ownership of 27 square meters of Gangwon-gun, Gosung-gun (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. The defendant occupies and uses the land of this case before the plaintiff acquired the ownership of the land of this case as the site of the building.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to return unjust enrichment from the possession and use of the land of this case to the plaintiff.

In the case of unjust enrichment, the amount of profit from the possession and use of real estate in the case of commerce shall be equivalent to the rent of the real estate. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as a result of the appraisal commission with respect to the party branch office of the certified public appraisal corporation which was newly known to the dispute resolution committee in this court, it can be recognized that the sum of rent of the land in this case is 641,410 won from February 15, 2016 to October 16, 2017, and the rent thereafter is confirmed to be 31,990 won per month.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff unjust enrichment calculated by the ratio of KRW 31,90 per month from October 17, 2017 to the date of the Plaintiff’s loss of ownership or the date of the Defendant’s completion of delivery, whichever comes first.

(3) The plaintiff argues that the period of prescription for acquisition of the registry of the land of this case has expired, but the above argument is not accepted since there is no evidence to deem that the defendant completed the registration of the land of this case as the owner of the land of this case, since the plaintiff simply specified the defendant's transfer of the land of this case as the completion date of return of unjust enrichment.

Next, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff's claim of this case constitutes abuse of rights, but there are no circumstances to recognize it.