1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including costs incurred by participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 26, 1985, Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, a supplementary intervenor owned by the Defendant, divided the instant land into the instant land and the Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 3 large 4.1 square meters. Among them, the Seoul Dongdaemun-gu c large 4.1 square meters was sold to the Plaintiff on April 10, 1985 upon the Plaintiff’s application for the division and purchase of the land allotted by the Plaintiff, who was the owner of neighboring land. On January 4, 1988, the Plaintiff was merged into Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, which was owned by the Plaintiff, and was cancelled.

B. Meanwhile, the instant land is originally included in the urban planning facilities (road) with a width of four meters, and was determined to be changed to the urban planning facilities (sec. 21 December 21, 198, publicly notified by Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and around that time, the instant sewage management officer was laid underground below 2.5 meters underground among the instant land and the Defendant currently occupied and managed the underground portion.

C. As to the instant land, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on April 15, 1985 on the ground that the Plaintiff sold the land on April 10, 1985.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 6 evidence, Eul 1, 2, Eul 4-1, 2, Eul 5 evidence, Eul 7-1 through 8, the result of the request for measurement and appraisal to the corporation of this court for the examination and appraisal, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The gist of the assertion asserts that the Plaintiff purchased the instant land from the Defendant’s Intervenor on April 15, 1985 and completed the registration of ownership transfer, and that it was the owner who occupied and managed the instant sewage pipes laid underground on the ground of the instant land by peace, public performance, good faith, and negligence, and that it was the owner who occupied and managed the instant sewage pipes laid underground on the ground of the instant land, the Plaintiff sought removal of the instant sewage pipes and payment of unjust enrichment due to the possession of the underground segment of the instant land.

As to this, the Defendant and the Defendant’s Intervenor sold 4.1 square meters of the mother land of this case, which was owned by the Defendant’s assistant intervenor on April 10, 1985, to the Plaintiff. However, the instant land is administrative property at the time.