1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Grounds for the court’s explanation concerning this part of the grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance

Paragraph (1) of the first instance judgment, with the exception that "the plaintiff completed the move-in report on the resident registration as Hasung-si B on February 6, 1996, and thereafter, the plaintiff (one manager, one warehouse, and one warehouse) among the manager of the orchard (hereinafter "the manager") constructed on the ground of the instant land from around that time, resides in the instant building "the building," and operates an orchard from ignsung-si C," is as stated in Paragraph (1) of the first instance judgment. Thus, the plaintiff shall accept it as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The instant building is not an unauthorized building, but a building that does not fall under a house or a real estate injured on the building ledger, but is a residential building. The Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (hereinafter “Land Compensation Act”) provides that the Plaintiff filed a report on the construction with the head of the YY-si in Gyeonggi-do and constructed in accordance with the content of the report.

(1) Article 78(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the former Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (amended by Presidential Decree No. 28806, Apr. 17, 2018; Presidential Decree of the former Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects (amended by Presidential Decree No. 28806, Apr. 17, 2018); hereinafter “Enforcement Decree of the former Act on Compensation for Land, Etc.” stipulates that “a person who loses his/her base of livelihood due to the provision of a residential building due

(A) Article 40(3)1 of the Land Compensation Act does not exclude “a building that has not obtained approval for use.” Therefore, the Plaintiff constitutes a person subject to measures for resettlement under the Land Compensation Act. 2) Article 3(2)4 of the Defendant’s “Guidelines for formulating guidelines for establishing immigration and livelihood countermeasures.”

Purpose, Gu.