1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 16, 1962, A, the father of the Plaintiff, completed the registration of ownership transfer based on sale on February 13, 1962, as to the 12 square meters of E-road 12 square meters (around 40 square meters of E-si, Ansan-si, through procedures, such as change of parcel number, etc.; hereinafter “instant land”).

B. After the filing of the instant lawsuit, A died on April 3, 2019, and the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant land on August 16, 2019 due to inheritance due to a division by agreement as of April 3, 2019.

C. The defendant currently occupies and manages the land of this case as a road.

【Ground of recognition】 Evidence Nos. 3, 6, and No. 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant occupied and used the land of this case without permission, thereby gaining a profit equivalent to the usage fee, and thereby causing damage to the plaintiff who is the owner of the land of this case.

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

B. The plaintiff asserted by the defendant cannot exercise his right to claim the return of unjust enrichment against the defendant on the following grounds.

1) Since from around 1960 to 20 years, the Defendant occupied the instant land in a peaceful and public manner with the intention to own it, the period of prescription for the Defendant’s possession of the instant land expired. Therefore, the Plaintiff, who inherited the instant land, is obligated to implement the procedure for ownership transfer registration based on the completion of the prescriptive acquisition period for the instant land. (2) At the time of the construction of the instant land as a road, H, who was the owner of the instant land, renounced the right to exclusive and exclusive use of the instant land at the time of the construction of the road, and A acquired the ownership of the instant land by knowing such circumstance

3. According to the judgment on the cause of the claim under paragraph (1), barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is equivalent to the usage fees that the Plaintiff acquired by occupying and using the instant land.