1. The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of KRW 3,571,200 on December 6, 2013 against Plaintiff D is revoked.

2. The plaintiff A, B, and.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiffs are the owners of each building located on each ground specified in the separate sheet of imposition of indemnity (hereinafter referred to as “building”).

B. On March 10, 1978, the Seoul Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government completed the registration of initial ownership preservation on the roads Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and thereafter Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government completed the registration of ownership transfer on the roads of Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on September 20, 198 due to the succession of the property on May 1, 198. On August 16, 2007, the Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F Road (hereinafter “instant land”) was divided.

C. On December 6, 2013, the Defendant, which manages the instant land, applied Article 81 of the former Public Property and Commodity Management Act (amended by Act No. 12201, Jan. 7, 2014; hereinafter the same) to Plaintiff A, B, and C on the ground that each of the buildings owned by the Plaintiffs on the instant land owned by Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government is occupied without permission due to an unauthorized occupation of each area indicated in the separate sheet of imposition of indemnity (hereinafter “each of the instant areas of possession”). In accordance with Article 94 of the former Road Act (amended by Act No. 1248, Jan. 14, 2014; hereinafter the same) with respect to Plaintiff D, the Defendant imposed indemnity as indicated in the separate sheet of imposition of indemnity (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

The plaintiffs filed the lawsuit of this case upon filing an objection.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2 evidence, Eul 3 evidence (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiffs' assertion (1) The defendant's disposition against the plaintiff A, B, and C is unlawful for the following reasons.

① The instant land constitutes general property and is subject to prescriptive acquisition, and the Plaintiff A, B, and C have owned and used each of the instant land by themselves or by all the former owners as their own intent for at least 20 years. As such, the instant land has been owned and used in a public performance and peace manner.