The Defendant, as the Plaintiff

(a) 7,734,494 won and the rate of 12% per annum from March 14, 2020 to the date of complete payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 30, 2009, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer due to a compulsory auction on January 28, 2009 with respect to each land listed in paragraph (1) of the attached Table Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”); the land listed in Paragraph (2) of the attached Table Nos. 2; and the land listed in Paragraph (3) of the attached Table No. 3, the land listed in the attached Table No. 1, 2, and 3, respectively; and the registration of ownership transfer due to a compulsory auction on January 28, 2009.

B. Each of the instant lands is used as a site or surrounding site of a road from at least 1967 to the present date, and the Defendant has recently stored and managed the land on the road.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1 to 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to return unjust enrichment from the occupation and use of each of the instant lands to the Plaintiff, the owner of each of the instant lands, barring special circumstances. 2) In light of the circumstance where each of the instant lands has been used as a road for a long time, the Defendant asserted that the previous owner of each of the instant lands renounced his/her exclusive right to use and benefit from each of the instant lands, and the Plaintiff also renounced his/her exclusive right to use and benefit from each of the instant lands. However, the evidence submitted by the Defendant alone is insufficient to recognize that the owner or the Plaintiff renounced his/her exclusive right to use and benefit from each of the instant lands at the time of construction of the road on each of the instant lands.