변상금부과처분취소
1. The Defendant’s imposition of indemnity amounting to KRW 583,369,980 on September 16, 2015 exceeds KRW 493,961,779, out of the imposition of indemnity amounting to the Plaintiff.
1. On September 16, 2015, the Defendant issued a disposition imposing indemnity of KRW 583,369,980 (the basis for calculation is the same as the attached Table 1; hereinafter “instant indemnity”) on the ground that the Plaintiff, who is a State-owned land, occupied without permission (the imposition period: January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2014) of KRW 1,864.4 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).
(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence 5-2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. The instant disposition asserted by the Plaintiff is unlawful for the following reasons.
1) Of the instant land, the Plaintiff did not possess 66 square meters in possession of the Plaintiff. (2) The Plaintiff paid full indemnities for the amount of 1,850 square meters in the said B’s land in accordance with the document “collection of State property indemnity” as of January 24, 2003, and thus, was erroneous as having obtained permission to use the entire amount of 1,850 square meters and did not know that there was no source of possessory right. Therefore, the Plaintiff does not constitute an unauthorized occupant.
3) Since the Defendant applied the usage fee rate of 20/100 to the period from January 1, 2010 to September 15, 2010, as it was for farming use at the time of commencement of possession, 10/100 shall apply to the usage fee rate of 10/100 for farming use. The Defendant’s indemnity for the period from January 1, 2010 to September 15, 2010 was extinguished by prescription.
B. Determination 1) As to the first assertion, among the instant land in question, 38.9 square meters (residential place) of the instant indemnity imposition period was occupied by C, not the Plaintiff, and the remainder (hereinafter “the portion occupied by the Plaintiff”) was occupied by the Plaintiff without any legal cause. Of the instant indemnity, the amount equivalent to the said 38.9 square meters (C possession portion) out of the instant indemnity amounting to KRW 15,395,040 (the basis for calculation is as shown in the attached Table 2
) A fact can be recognized (the fact that there is no dispute, Eul's evidence Nos. 5, 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings. According to this, the above 15,395,040 among the disposition of this case is about the part that the plaintiff did not occupy and use.