beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The fact that the Defendant, on November 19, 2013, who managed the 473-2 large scale 630 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”), a state-owned land in the process of disposal, issued a disposition imposing indemnity of KRW 15,969,560 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the ground that the Plaintiff occupied the instant land without permission from January 12, 2009 to October 17, 2013, is either not disputed between the parties or recognized by the evidence No. 1.
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) is in a position to acquire and use the instant land without compensation until the Plaintiff continues to exist pursuant to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, such as the former Framework Act on Vocational Training, and the Plaintiff’s use of the said land with the knowledge that the contract was renewed from May 1, 1989 to January 11, 2009 by concluding a free loan agreement only in the form and renewal of the contract but filing an application for re-loan after the expiration of the lease period. Therefore, the instant disposition based on the premise that the Plaintiff occupied the instant land without permission
(2) The Plaintiff, who is a school juristic person, has been using the instant land for more than 40 years, was able to anticipate the renewal of the loan agreement even after the expiration of the loan period, and even after having received any objection from the management agency, imposing indemnity solely on the ground that there was no specific loan agreement, is against the principle of trust.
B. (1) Determination (A) Article 2 Subparag. 9 of the State Property Act provides that a person who uses, benefits from, or occupies State property without permission for use or loan agreement, or who continues to use, benefits from, or occupies State property without permission for use or loan agreement, after the expiration of the period for permission for use or loan agreement, shall be deemed an indemnity to be imposed on the person who has occupied State property without permission for use or loan agreement, and Article 72(1) of the State Property Act