beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On August 30, 2007, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on a river of 15,719 square meters and E river of 3,055 square meters (hereinafter “each of the instant rivers”).
B. Each of the rivers of this case was designated as a local river as a public notice of F on March 1, 1965 and managed by the Defendant as a local river (G, Class II river) by installing a sewage pipeline around 1994.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2-2, Eul evidence 1-1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. On the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff asserts that, since the Defendant occupied each of the instant rivers without permission, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of the rent of KRW 40,105,740 as the annual rent from January 24, 2014 to September 23, 2019, and KRW 616,020 as the monthly rent from September 24, 2019.
However, according to the above facts, each of the rivers in this case was designated and announced as a local river under the River Act. Thus, the defendant cannot be viewed as occupying each of the rivers in this case without any legal grounds.
Any owner of land who suffers a loss due to the incorporation of such land into a river area for which the provisions of Article 74 of the River Act apply mutatis mutandis shall consult with the river management agency in accordance with the provisions of Article 74 of the same Act, and if such consultation is not reached or is impossible, he may immediately file an administrative lawsuit against the competent Land Tribunal to compensate for the loss according to the result of the administrative litigation against the competent Land Tribunal and may not directly file a claim for compensation for the loss by civil litigation against the river management agency. In addition, as long as the land is incorporated into a river area, the owner shall be subject to restrictions on the exercise of his private right to use and profit-making, apart from the compensation for loss under Article 74 of the same Act