1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. Of the size of 1,036 m2, the attached Form 1,20 to 32, 6, 7, 33 through 44.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 16, 1994, the Plaintiff filed for registration of ownership preservation on the land of 1,036 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) in the name of Gangseo-gun, Gangwon-gu.

B. Of the instant land, there is a road packed by the Defendant on the ground of a part of 300 square meters of “bb” on the ground that connects each point of the attached drawing Nos. 1, 20 through 32, 6, 7, 33 through 44, 18, 19, and 1 in sequence, among the instant land (hereinafter “instant road”).

C. On the other hand, adjacent to the instant land, there are lots of land 4,483 square meters (hereinafter “instant road”) owned by the Republic of Korea, Gangwon-gun, Gangwon-gun, Gangwon-do.

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 5, the result of the appraisal commission to the branch offices of the Korea Land Information Corporation, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. Despite the existence of the instant C road in the vicinity of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Defendant opened the instant road without permission, sealed the asphalt, and used it as a road until now.

Therefore, the Plaintiff seeks a return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the removal and use of the database on the road of this case against the Defendant.

B. The Defendant alleged that the road of this case was naturally formed in around 1950, and the width was expanded, and the concrete packaging was conducted in around 1990, and around 2014, the Defendant packaged a container on the road of this case by the residents’ agreement including the Plaintiff.

The Plaintiff had already acquired the ownership of the instant land in the state of concrete packing, and agreed at the time of the container packing. The Plaintiff renounced the exclusive use of and the right to benefit from the instant portion of the instant land.

Therefore, all of the plaintiff's claims are improper.

3. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the Defendant, as the occupant of the instant road, is the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant land, barring any special circumstance.