The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiffs.

A. From June 30, 1965, the networkO owned each of the lands listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”) and died on March 29, 1989. Plaintiff A, B, C, D, and network P succeeded to the networkO’s property. The network P died on February 9, 2012 and succeeded to Plaintiff E, F, and G’s property.

B. Q was designated as a local second-class river in Gyeonggi-do by R publicly announced on March 1, 1965 by Gyeonggi-do. At present, each of the lands listed in paragraphs 1 through 6 among each of the instant lands is classified as a river, the category of which is “river”, and the land listed in paragraph 7 among each of the instant lands is a bank site, and a bank road is installed on the ground.

[Ground of Recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 4 through 7, video (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. With respect to the lawsuit of this case against the defendant for compensation for damages caused by illegal acts equivalent to the rent, return of unjust enrichment, and transfer of each of the lands of this case on the ground that the plaintiffs owned each of the lands of this case without any legal grounds possessed as a river site, according to the provisions of the River Act, the defendant is entitled to file an application for adjudication with the competent Land Tribunal under the conditions as prescribed by Article 76 of the River Act where the plaintiffs, the owners of land who suffered losses due to incorporation of each of the lands listed in paragraphs 1 through 6 into a river area of Q Q, a local second-class river, are subject to consultation with the river management agency under the conditions as prescribed by Article 76 of the River Act, and if they fail to reach an agreement or are unable to reach an agreement, they can immediately file an administrative litigation against the competent Land Tribunal on the adjudication itself. However, if the plaintiffs were not allowed to file a civil lawsuit against the direct river management agency.