1. The part of the conjunctive claim in the instant lawsuit is dismissed.

2. The plaintiffs' primary claims are dismissed.

3...

1. Basic facts

A. 1) The ownership relationship, etc. of the instant land is 969 square meters prior to Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government M (hereinafter “instant land”).

On May 15, 1981, with respect to shares 2/5 in N, on November 7, 1989, each ownership transfer registration was made for shares 3/5 in K on November 7, 1989. 2) The land in this case was designated and publicly announced as a river area for P, which is a river to which public notice of Seoul Special Metropolitan City was given, on April 13, 1966, and thereafter the Seoul Special Metropolitan City registers the land in this case as a river area by registering it on the river ledger around December 200.

3) On August 25, 1996, N succeeded to Plaintiff E, F, G, H, I, and J, their wife and children, according to their respective inheritance shares. L also died on August 21, 2012, and succeeded to their respective inheritance shares according to their respective inheritance shares. K died on February 9, 2010 and succeeded to their respective inheritance shares. The Plaintiff B, C, and D, their wife A and their children, succeeded to their property rights. (b) On July 2, 2010, K, L, E, E, F, H, I, I, and J (hereinafter referred to as “adjudication applicants”) transferred the instant land to the Mayor of Seoul Special Metropolitan City and claimed compensation for damages caused by the restriction on the exercise of the right to use and make profits from the instant land available for a river, and filed an application for adjudication with the Defendant for adjudication.

2) Accordingly, on July 2, 2010, the Defendant: (a) readed the aerial photography taken by the 1966 National Land Information Institute; (b) was at the time of designation as a river area; and (c) there was no change in the river topographical map; (b) it cannot be deemed that the owner of the instant land was the original detention reservoir before the designation and removal of a local Class II river which was incorporated into a river area; and (c) thus, the applicant’s claim for compensation for losses was groundless (hereinafter “adjudication on July 2, 2010”).

(C) The Plaintiffs were 1) Seoul Central District Court 2012Kadan19422.