Abstract: Imposed benefit refers to the benefit against the defendant's autonomy. Based on the respect for the defendant's freedom of choice， such benefit is not enrichment for a particular defendant. Therefore， there is no unjust enrichment. This is an issue in the first stage of whether the obligation based on unjust enrichment can be established， rather than in the second stage of whether restitution should be qualified by subjective devaluation. When the benefit is incontrovertible or is chosen by the defendant， there is no imposed benefit. The defendant has chosen the benefit if there is a request， retention of readily returnable benefit， free acceptance， or subsequently confirmation. Regarding whether the defendant has chosen the benefit or evaluated the benefit， it should be viewed from a reasonable third person in the position of the defendant.

Key words: imposed benefit; unjust enrichment; incontrovertible benefit; choice of benefit; subjective devaluation