1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, KRW 4,437,773 against the Defendants, jointly and severally, and the Plaintiff from February 1, 2014 to February 1, 2015.

1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the whole purport of the arguments as a result of the survey and clinical appraisal conducted by the appraiser C of the first instance trial and D, and by the following facts: Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and Eul evidence Nos. 2 through 6 (including paper numbers);

From December 26, 1968 to December 26, 1968, the Plaintiff owns 582 square meters of E miscellaneous land in Yangju-si (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

나. 피고들은 이 사건 부동산 인근의 양주시 F, G 토지의 소유자들로서 위 각 토지를 공장부지로 이용하면서 이 사건 부동산 중 도로 55㎡(별지 도면 표시 1, 30, 31, 28, 29, 1의 각 점을 차례로 연결한 선내 ㉮ 부분 20㎡, 같은 도면 표시 1, 2, 32, 33, 27, 31, 30, 1의 각 점을 차례로 연결한 선내 ㉱ 부분 29㎡, 같은 도면 표시 37, 39, 19, 38, 37의 각 점을 차례로 연결한 선내 ㉲ 부분 6㎡)와 노견 89㎡(별지 도면 표시 1, 2, 32, 33, 27, 31, 1의 각 점을 차례로 연결한 선내 ㉯ 부분 60㎡, 같은 도면 표시 21, 34, 35, 20, 21의 각 점을 차례로 연결한 선내 ㉰ 부분 6㎡, 같은 도면 표시 36, 40, 41, 42, 43, 39, 37, 36의 각 점을 차례로 연결한 선내 ㉳ 부분 23㎡) 등 144㎡(이하 위 도로 및 노견을 합하여 ‘이 사건 도로부분’이라 한다)를 공장 진출입로로 사용하고 있다.

C. The rent from January 2008 to January 201, 2014 of the instant road portion is equivalent to KRW 4,437,773.

2. Judgment on the parties' arguments

A. According to the above facts, the Defendants jointly and severally filed a claim for return of unjust enrichment amounting to KRW 4,437,773 on the road portion of this case and the following day after the date of delivery of the complaint (payment order) to the Plaintiff, and it is reasonable to dispute the scope of the Defendants’ obligation to pay from February 1, 2014, which is the day following the date of establishment of the above claim for return of unjust enrichment, until November 5, 2015.