1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 735,077,890 and October 10, 2012.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff (a foundation B, school foundation B, and C are the names before the change of the Plaintiff’s organization; hereinafter collectively referred to as “Plaintiff”) acquired ownership of each of the lands listed in [Attachment 2] Nos. 1 through 8 as indicated in the following table (hereinafter referred to as “land Nos. 1 through 8”; hereinafter collectively referred to as “each of them”), and its location and nature are also indicated in [Attachment 3].

On January 8, 1963, the date of the registration for the transfer of land ownership on June 28, 1962, the land No. 3 land on June 28, 1962, the date of the registration for the transfer of land ownership.

In around 1968, Seoul Special Metropolitan City: (a) each of the lands of this case except for the land No. 3 (in the case of the land No. 2 and 5, including only the parts listed in attached Table 1 No. 2 and 5 among each of the above lands; (b) when referring to each of the lands of this case used as a road site, “O site” (in the case of the land No. 1 through No. 8, referred to as “O site”; and (c) and the land adjacent to the land No. 1, 4, and 5, which are the land adjacent to the land No. 3 Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government. The land is used as a site for the road connected to H school entrance and G up to now.

C. Meanwhile, around 1971, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City implemented the IJ Construction Works on the land adjacent to the third land without the consent of the plaintiff on the third land, and the third land is being used as the site for the above India until now.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute; Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 (including numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply); the result of the on-site inspection of the political party; the result of the survey and appraisal of the party appraiser AP; the fact-finding results on the above AP; the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. 1) The parties’ assertion (1) as to the cause of the return of unjust enrichment (a) the Plaintiff’s assertion. The Defendant is the instant case.