1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Details of the disposition

The Plaintiff is the owner of 711 square meters in Namyang-si, Namyang-si (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”).

On June 24, 2008, the Defendant: (a) formulated a basic urban planning for Namyang-si in 2020 pursuant to the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”); (b) published D’s urban management plan (financial expenses); (c) re-published on December 5, 2008, the urban management plan (financial expenses) partially changed to E’s announcement at Yangyang-si; and (d) determined to install a landscape plaza (hereinafter “instant landscape plaza”) on a 6,587 square meters including part of the instant land in the process; and (e) announced a decision on the urban management plan (revision) and topographic map as F’s notification at Yangyang-si on August 6, 2009.

On January 21, 2016, the Defendant publicly announced the authorization for the implementation of the H project (road, railroad, landscape square, buffer green belt, river) with respect to the H project on the creation of the landscape plaza in this case (hereinafter referred to as the “project in this case”) as G G to Nam-si, Nam-si, but at the time, the land in this case was not included in the site of the landscape plaza in this case.

On June 29, 2017, the Defendant included 519 square meters, etc. among the instant land as the site for the instant scenic plaza, and publicly announced Bro Management Plan (Modification), implementation plan modification authorization (hereinafter “instant disposition”), and topographic drawings (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the content of excluding a part of the instant land.

[Ground of recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 6, 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the entire pleading as to whether the disposition of this case is legitimate or not, the land of this case has satisfied the requirements for a place of a landscape plaza stipulated in the Rules on the Determination, Structure and Installation Standards of Urban and Gun Planning Facilities (hereinafter “Rules”), and thus, the disposition of this case is unlawful.

The defendant shall designate and manage the land of this case as buffer greenbelts for a long time, and the plaintiff's property right.