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. Details of the disposition;

A. The registration of ownership transfer has been completed in the Republic of Korea with respect to the B large 764 square meters (hereinafter “instant one”) and C large 56 square meters (hereinafter “instant two land”).

B. On March 30, 2010, the Defendant issued a disposition imposing indemnity of KRW 29,550,840 of the indemnity under Article 72 of the former State Property Act (amended by Act No. 10485, Mar. 30, 201) on the ground that the Plaintiff occupied and used the instant land 1 and 2 without permission (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1-1 and 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The plaintiff did not possess or use the land of this case 1 and 2. 2) Even if not, since D (hereinafter "D") acquired ownership on the land of this case 1 and 2 due to the completion of the prescription period for the acquisition of possession, the disposition of this case on the premise that the Republic of Korea is the owner of the land of this case 1 and 2 shall be revoked as unlawful.

B. 1) First, in light of the purport of the entire pleadings as to whether the Plaintiff occupied and used the instant land 1, 2, 3, and 5, the following facts are examined: (a) building was installed on the land above the instant land, such as 65.52 square meters per cement 1, 2, 3, and 5, and 12.95 square meters per 12.95 square meters per 1, 2, and 12.95 square meters per 1, the cement 1, 2, and 2, and the instant land was used as the site of posium; (b) the registration of ownership preservation was completed on July 30, 1986 for the instant land 1, and the said building and 2, and the Plaintiff is widely known to the inspection; (c) according to the above facts, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff is not the owner of the instant building, which is the owner of the instant land, as the owner of the instant temple.