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. The reasoning of this court’s judgment citing the judgment of the first instance is partly dismissed or added as follows, and the Plaintiff’s assertion added or emphasized by this court is identical to the ground of the judgment of the first instance, except as otherwise determined in paragraph (2). As such, it shall be cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the

The second 10 written judgment of the court of first instance is the "C reservoir". The second 10 written judgment of the court of first 10 shall be "C reservoir."

The third 19 to 20 main 19 of the judgment of the court of first instance (Seoul High Court 2018Nu55335) is "The plaintiff appealed against it and continues to appeal at the present appellate court (Seoul High Court 2018Nu55335)" and "the above judgment became final and conclusive since all of the plaintiff's appeals and appeals against it were dismissed (Seoul High Court 2018Nu55335 decided January 31, 2019 and Supreme Court 2019Du3615 decided June 13, 2019)."

The fourth 8 written evidence of the first instance judgment shall be "1, 17, 18", and the nine "content" shall be deemed "including, hereinafter the same shall apply."

From the 5th day of the first instance judgment to the 10th day of the "damage" of the 7th day shall be as follows:

The liability to compensate KRW 9,198,932 in total, including damages, i.e., damage to the safety facilities of a fishing place, damage to water and loss of a fishing place, etc. 45,749,233 won, active damages equivalent to the total of KRW 43,49,69 won due to the suspension of operation of a fishing place business from January 1, 2016 to June 15, 2019, and the total of KRW 10,000,000 for consolation money, and KRW 9,198,932, such as KRW 10,000,000, etc.

Article 12 (1) (proviso) of the first instance judgment and Article 9 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act shall be added to the 7th end of the 16th sentence. “In addition, it is legitimate for the Plaintiff to permit a fishing place business for a fixed period of three years from April 15, 2013, where the Ansan market is less than 10 years and it is less than 10 years.”

Article 10 (5) 2 of the Fishing Management and Promotion Act, which is deemed to have obtained permission for use for the rearrangement of agro-fishery villages, upon obtaining permission for fishing place business at the end of 21 of the 7th judgment of the first instance.