변상금부과처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. On December 15, 2016, the Defendant issued to the Plaintiff a disposition imposing indemnity of KRW 376,740 for five years from the year 2012 to the year 2016 pursuant to Article 15 of the Public Waters Management and Reclamation Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff occupied the said two parcels of land, including the 1,890 square meters of B, Gwangju-si, Gwangju-si, a State-owned land, and C, the 404 square meters of land (hereinafter “instant plot of land”).
[Ground of recognition] No dispute, Gap 1, 6, and Eul 5's entries, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. In light of the fact that the ditch site of this case, including the part of the Plaintiff’s assertion, was occupied and used as farmland from the time of the Plaintiff’s preference to farmland, the acquisition by prescription has been completed, that the Defendant obtained permission from the Plaintiff or received and implemented a neighboring land without compensation when the Defendant maintains the ditch site of this case or performs the flood restoration project, and that the Defendant used another site owned by the Plaintiff as a river but did not pay a usage fee, etc., the instant disposition is unlawful.
(b) The attached Form of relevant statutes is as follows.
C. According to the State Property Act, an administrative property under the State Property Act refers to a property owned by the State that is directly used or determined to be used for public, public, or corporate purposes (Article 6(2)). Among them, an artificial property, such as ditches, is either designated by a statute or determined to be used for public purposes by an administrative disposition, or is actually used as an administrative property (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Da41533, Oct. 15, 2009). Meanwhile, Article 7(2) of the State Property Act provides that “Administrative property shall not be subject to prescriptive acquisition, notwithstanding Article 245 of the Civil Act.”