1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On November 11, 1996, the Plaintiff made a registration of preservation of ownership with respect to the Climate B (hereinafter “B”), and made use of the registration of extraction and transportation with respect to the aggregate extraction in each area of the aggregate extraction area located within the middle-water extraction area located within the middle-water area located within the 106th of the Sinsan-si in Yangsan-si from the place where permission to extract aggregate was granted for the aggregate extraction in Yangsan-si, Yangsan-si, and from the aggregate open area located within the 106th of the Sinsan-si, Kimhae-si, the Plaintiff made a registration of the transfer of ownership with respect to the aggregate extraction from C on November 14, 2007 to the area where the aggregate extraction is located within the 10th of the Sinsan-si.

(b) The contents of river works - The name of the river works - The six sections of the Nakdong River Dog-Jado (Yasan 1 & Gan Sea 2 Area) project (hereinafter referred to as "the instant river works"): The implementation date of the implementation plan - the Busan Regional Land Management Office - the implementer: the implementation area: the Busan Regional Land Management Office - the river area from the additional interest rate of the Dong-ri to the water rate of the water-Eup in Yangsan-si, Yangsan-si, the Seosan-dong, the Seosan-dong, the Dog-si, the Seosan-si, the Dog-si

C. On February 21, 2013, the Defendant purchased the instant vessel from the Plaintiff on May 15, 2013, and completed the registration of ownership transfer for the instant vessel on May 15, 2013. The Defendant calculated KRW 155,387,00 for B, and KRW 103,452,00 for D as a subsidy for the restructuring of aggregate extraction business; however, on June 3, 2013, the Defendant determined that the Plaintiff could not be granted the restructuring subsidy on the ground that the Plaintiff was not eligible for the restructuring due to the Plaintiff’s discontinuance of business prior to the announcement date of the implementation plan for the instant river works.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 6 through 12, 14, 22, Eul evidence No. 4 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff filed a report on business closure on October 30, 2007, but maintained the business status for collecting and transporting aggregate, and made business registration again on October 5, 2009.