공유재산변상금부과처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On the land located in Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan City, which is public property owned by Busan Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant land”) and part of C, the Plaintiff installed two vinyl houses (the occupied area of 221 square meters; hereinafter “instant vinyl houses”) and occupied them on the land located in the Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan City, Busan Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant land”).
B. The Defendant notified the Plaintiff on October 11, 2017, on the ground that the Plaintiff occupied the instant land without permission from November 24, 2012 to October 11, 2017, while managing the instant land delegated by Busan Metropolitan City, that the Plaintiff would be liable to compensate, and on November 10, 2017, imposed a total of 36,48,030 won of the indemnity for the said possession period.
(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.
The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed a petition with the Busan Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission, but was dismissed on January 23, 2018.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1-10 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff asserted that the instant disposition should be revoked for the following reasons.
1) The instant land is the president of the Korea Rural Community Corporation (hereinafter “Corporation”) from the past.
(2) The Plaintiff, while carrying out the G Construction Project in 2017, urged the Plaintiff to hold a consultation on obstacles to the instant plastic houses on the ground of the instant land, etc. on the ground that the Plaintiff did not occupy the instant land without permission, as the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement on the instant land and the instant plastic greenhouse. Thus, the Plaintiff did not occupy the instant land without permission. However, even if the Plaintiff imposed indemnity on the ground of illegal occupation. (2) In carrying out the G Construction Project in 2017, the Defendant urged the Plaintiff to hold a consultation on the instant plastic houses on the ground of the instant land