1. As to the Plaintiff KRW 14,090,00 and KRW 12,622,00 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 14,00 from October 29, 2013, KRW 1,468,00.

1. Basic facts

(a) Appendix 1 1;

2. On the same day, the land was partitioned in the answer B at Kimhae-si on December 5, 194, and the land category was maintained, the land category of which was changed to ditches was completed on June 8, 196, in order of the Plaintiff on March 9, 1981, the registration of transfer of ownership based on each sale was completed in the order of the Plaintiff on March 8, 196, and the Schedule 1 attached hereto.

3. The land is divided into D’s land on November 6, 1996, and the land category was changed to the maintenance of the land category on the same day. On January 19, 1981, the registration of ownership transfer was completed for sale in the Plaintiff’s future. On April 9, 2014, the Plaintiff donated each of the above land to Nonparty F and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the same day.

B. Since that time, the Japanese governor of the Korean War implemented the second emergency expansion project in 1943, the Japanese governor of the Japanese War was newly built a nationwide sub-sponsive land, and the attached Table 1 Schedule 1;

2. Land is located within the “absium (including bank)” (including bank) constructed as part of the above project, and is set out in Appendix 1.

3. Land is located within the “dyp site” constructed as part of the above project, and each of the above sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-sub

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5-2, fact-finding results to the President of the National Archives of Korea, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. In general, part of the land that constitutes a reservoir is in possession of the person who owns and manages the reservoir (see Supreme Court Decision 95Da2074 delivered on July 28, 1995). According to the above facts, according to the above facts of recognition, the defendant occupies and uses each land in attached Table 1 (hereinafter referred to as "each land in this case"), thereby obtaining profits from the use of each land in this case, and thereby causes damage equivalent to the amount of the land to the plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent, unless there are special circumstances.