1. The defendant

(a) 11,112,800 won and a rate of 12% per annum from September 7, 2019 to the date of complete payment.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. Each of the instant lands is owned by the Plaintiff; the land Nos. 1 listed in the separate sheet among the instant lands (hereinafter “instant land”) on July 6, 1936; the land Nos. 2 listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant land”) on July 15, 1924, the land category of which was changed to a road; although the land category was not indicated on the land category before the land category was changed to a road, it appears that each of the instant lands was used as the “former”; while each of the instant lands was used as the “former”; when the land category was changed to a land category for 1924 and 1936, each of the instant lands appears to have been used as the “former”; and when each of the instant land was used as the “previous”; the rent for rent for the period from September 13, 2013 to December 12, 2011; and the rent for the instant land from September 13, 2018 to September 18, 2018.

[Based on Recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, this court's commission of appraisal to the President of the Korea Land Information Corporation, C's Jeju branch office, and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts, the defendant who occupies each land of this case is obligated to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent to the plaintiff who is the owner of the land of this case, and the specific amount of unjust enrichment is as stated in Paragraph 1 of this Article. Thus, barring any special circumstance, barring any special circumstance, the defendant returned unjust enrichment as stated in Paragraph 1 of this Article, and the plaintiff claims both unjust enrichment as to the land of this case and the claim for unjust enrichment as to the claim for future unjust enrichment as to the land of this case. However, according to the video of the cadastral map (Evidence B) and the land of this case, the land of this case and the land of this case are not connected.