1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is 3,546,00 won and 3,546,000 won.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 1, 1968, the deceased C purchased land of Jeonnam-gun on May 1, 1968 and the same month;

2. Upon completing the registration of ownership transfer, the land of this case was divided from the above D land on August 24, 1971, and its land category was changed to “road”.

On the other hand, the land of this case was reported on August 1, 1971 as non-taxable land.

B. On August 23, 1972, Korea opened roads on surrounding land, including the instant land, and determined them as urban planning zones to create parks, squares, etc. and publicly announced them in the Official Gazette on the 25th of the same month.

From around that time, the defendant has been using the surrounding land including the land of this case as a road by carrying out packing works.

C. On January 26, 2011, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant land due to inheritance due to a consultation and division as of December 5, 2010.

The result of the appraisal of rent for the instant land is as shown in the attached Form, and when the status of use is premised on the transfer, the amount equivalent to rent for around October 1, 2015 shall be KRW 33,941 per month (=25,456,00 won ±0.06 ± 0.016 ± 12 months, and less than KRW 12 months; hereinafter the same shall apply). Under the premise that the status of use is a road, the amount equivalent to rent for around October 1, 2015 of the instant land shall be KRW 13,530 per month (=10,148,000 ± 0.0 ± 0.16 ±12 months).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 7, 10 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the result of the court of first instance’s entrustment to appraiser G, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the principal lawsuit

A. According to the above facts, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to return unjust enrichment from the possession and use of the instant land to the Plaintiff, barring any special circumstance. 2) The Defendant’s waiver of the right to benefit from use (1 Defendant, the network C, having raised an objection or compensation as it used the instant land as a road.