1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) 11,742,500 won and this shall be from June 26, 2015.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The land of this case was combined with the land E, F, G, H, and I on January 30, 1980 with the land of 1425 square meters (hereinafter “the land of this case”) in Namyang-si, Nam-si, B, 133 square meters of the road of this case (hereinafter “the land before the instant subdivision”) on February 22, 1994.

The land is divided as the urban planning line in the port and changed to a road on November 21, 1996.

B. On May 25, 1978, the Governor of the Gyeonggi-do determined the instant land as an urban planning center by the Gyeonggi-do Public NoticeJ of Gyeonggi-do.

C. On February 22, 1994, C acquired ownership of the land prior to the subdivision of this case on December 29, 1978 divided four parcels, other than D land, into eight parcels, and newly constructed a building on D land and four parcels, after obtaining a construction permit on July 25, 1994. On November 21, 1996, after completion, C changed the land category of the land of this case from the border to the road, and used the land of this case as the access road to the parking lot of the building.

The instant land is adjacent to the K road (which is divided on February 22, 1994, from the L land owned by C) as the asphalt package, and the other end is adjacent to the NN road owned by the Defendant and is used as the passage of neighboring residents and the general public.

On the other hand, sewage management is laid underground on the land of this case.

E. On October 30, 2004, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the instant land by public auction.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 14 (including each number in the case of additional numbers), Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Eul evidence and images, the result of the on-site inspection by this court, the fact inquiry by the court of first instance for the case of Namyang-ju, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of claim, the defendant is obligated to return the amount equivalent to the rent of the land of this case to the plaintiff as unjust enrichment, barring special circumstances, since the defendant occupies the land of this case owned by the plaintiff.

B. Judgment on the defendant's defense 1.