beta
Text
1. The defendant
A. Plaintiff A, KRW 7,276,440, KRW 5,101,140, Plaintiff C, D, E, F, and G respectively, and KRW 1,971,120.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The land indicated in paragraph (1) of the attached Table List (hereinafter “instant land”) was divided into a road on February 1, 1985 and its category was changed to a road, at the same time, from the 182 square meters of land before Seopopo-si, Seopo-si, Hapo-si, the Plaintiff-owned.
B. The land indicated in the attached list No. 2 (hereinafter “instant land”) was divided on February 1, 1985 from the 1stm231m2 before the division, the Plaintiff-owned, to which the land category was changed to the road.
C. The land indicated in the attached list No. 3 (hereinafter “instant land”) was divided on February 1, 1985 from K, which was owned by J, to 334 square meters, and the land category was changed to a road at the same time, and the registration of ownership transfer was completed on October 16, 1995.
Attached Form
The land listed in paragraph (4) of the list (hereinafter referred to as the "land of this case") was divided on February 1, 1985 from the N 450 square meters, which was owned by M and its category was changed to a road. On July 23, 2003, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on June 4, 2003 due to inheritance by consultation division.
O As of January 25, 2014, there are Plaintiffs C, D, E, F, and G, who are their children.
E. The location of the land in this case ① is indicated in the annexed drawings, ①, ②, ③, and ④ (red red red).
The yellow part of the same drawing constitutes the original “P”. The Defendant, when performing road expansion works around 1984, incorporated the instant or the instant land into a part of the “P”, and changed its land category on February 1, 1985 to a road, has occupied and managed each of the said land as a road from that time.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, A1 through 7, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15 (including virtual numbers), the purport of all pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts, unless there are special circumstances, the defendant occupies and uses the land of this case and the land of this case without any legal grounds. Thus, the plaintiffs (the plaintiffs C, D, E, F, and G are the owners and the successors ofO) are reasonable in terms of the rent.