All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

The lower court determined that the former owners renounced their exclusive right to use and benefit from each of the instant lands, and rejected the Plaintiffs’ claim for return of unjust enrichment corresponding to the rent for the following reasons, on the grounds that each of the instant lands was already divided into the current form in around 1939, and its location and form is inappropriate as a housing site, and a part of the road network where the space between the neighboring building sites was used as a passage.

Examining the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the waiver of exclusive use rights and the burden of proof, or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, in so determining, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.