1. All the claims of the plaintiff and the plaintiff succeeding intervenor are dismissed.

2. Of the litigation costs, the Plaintiff and the Defendant incurred.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner who completed the registration of ownership transfer concerning the instant land on May 11, 1996.

B. The instant land was discussed around 1969, and around 1972, and the instant bank was installed from around 1974.

C. On July 26, 1996, the defendant designated and announced the "C", which is a local small river, based on Article 3(2) of the Small River Maintenance Act, and included the land in the small river area under the Small River Maintenance Act, and around 2001 laid the sewage culvert on the land.

The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant occupied the instant land without title, and filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for unjust enrichment by this court was against the Defendant. However, on June 11, 2013, the said court rendered a judgment dismissing the part of the conjunctive claim for damages on the ground that the Defendant’s act of occupation and use of the instant land did not constitute a tort on the grounds that the Defendant’s act of occupation and use of the instant land cannot be deemed a tort, as stipulated in Article 24 of the Small River Maintenance Act.

On July 11, 2014, the above judgment became final and conclusive since all of the plaintiff's appeal and appeal were dismissed.

E. The Plaintiff filed an application for adjudication of compensation for losses on the ground that the original state market, the managing authority of the instant land, completed the construction of a concrete culvert on the instant land without any permission in 2001, and he/she occupied and used the instant land without title, but did not hold compensation consultation. The Gangwon-do local Land Tribunal did not establish an implementation plan for small river maintenance under Article 8 of the Small River Maintenance Act on August 28, 2015, and did not implement public works.