1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 30, 1973, the Korea Expressway Corporation changed the category of the land of 678 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) prior to Yansan-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Jeoncheon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, which was owned by the said construction (hereinafter “instant land”). On May 7, 1985, the Korea Expressway Corporation changed the category of the said land to “the former”).

B. On April 1, 1994, the Plaintiff purchased the instant land from the Korea Highway Corporation and completed the registration of ownership transfer on June 1, 1994.

C. The Defendant is the owner of the area of 744 square meters (hereinafter “Defendant-owned land”) adjacent to the instant land, the location of the instant land and the land owned by the Defendant is as shown in the cadastral map 1 attached hereto.

In the instant land, the points of which are indicated in the annexed drawing Nos. 12, 13, 24, 25, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 12 among the instant land are successively connected to each of the instant land; (b) the portion of the instant land, which is connected with each of the points of the same drawing Nos. 13, 14, 15, 16, 25, 24, and 13 in sequence, among the instant land, are cement concrete packaging, and thus, village residents are being used as roads.

(hereinafter referred to as “road portion of the instant land”). 【No dispute exists concerning the road portion of the instant land (based on recognition), entry in Gap 3 through 6, Eul 2 and 3, the result of the commission of surveying and appraising the Korea Land Information Corporation, the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. Determination of the parties' arguments

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the part of the instant land to the Plaintiff and return the amount equivalent to the profit of use to unjust enrichment, as the Defendant occupied and used the part of the instant land owned by the Plaintiff as a road, thereby gaining profit equivalent to the profit of use. Accordingly, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to transfer the part of the instant land to the Plaintiff and return the amount equivalent

B. The Defendant’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff renounced the exclusive and exclusive right to use and benefit from the instant land. 2) The original owner of the land is the land.