The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and the purport of the appeal are the judgment of the first instance.

1. The reasons for admitting the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, except for adding the following judgments as to the allegations made by the plaintiff in this court, and thus, they are cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. According to the district unit plan regarding the Plaintiff’s assertion on the land of this case, the part of the land indicated in [Attachment 1] List 2 and the land indicated in [Attachment 1] List 1 are organized as a general commercial area, and construction is possible because it is not designated as a road.

This constitutes a significant change in the land use status as a change in the land use plan.

If the Plaintiff’s father B and C offered the instant land to the general public

Even if there were changes in circumstances, such as changes in land use plan, etc., the plaintiff can exercise full ownership, including the right to benefit from use.

The instant land was inevitably left as a road in the course of subdivision, and was designated as a site for a road at the beginning, or was not used as a road voluntarily by B, etc., so that B, etc. renounced exclusive and exclusive rights to use and benefit from the land.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to return unjust enrichment to the plaintiff.

B. Restrictions on the exercise of exclusive and exclusive rights by land owners are premised on public interest due to the provision of land to the public for use by the general public. Therefore, it should be deemed that land owners continue to exist only to the extent that objective land use status at the time of providing the land for public purposes is maintained.

Therefore, land owners are entitled to exclusive use and benefit by providing land owned by them to the public.