1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who was transferred on April 2, 2002, B (the death around August 2002) the ownership of the block structure, cement bridges, and b14 square meters (hereinafter “instant building”) located on the Nam-gu Busan Metropolitan City, Busan Metropolitan City, which is a general property owned by the State (hereinafter “instant land”). The Defendant is a person who was transferred the right to manage the instant land from the head of Nam-gu Busan Metropolitan City (hereinafter “the head of Nam-gu”). The Defendant is a person who was transferred the right to manage the instant land from the head of Nam-gu, Busan Metropolitan City (hereinafter “the head of Nam-gu”).

B. Since around 1994, the head of South Korea, the former managing authority of the instant land, imposed indemnity on the ground that B had occupied the instant land without permission while building the instant building on the instant land from around 1994, and that B did not pay indemnity within the payment period. As such, on the ground that B did not pay indemnity, he/she taken measures to seize the instant building as the Busan District Court’s East Busan District Court’s Branch Office of 5461 received on February 16, 1995 (hereinafter “instant attachment”).

C. On December 2, 2012, the Plaintiff paid KRW 2,077,570, the amount of indemnity imposed after the instant seizure, which is the delinquent amount, to the time of the instant seizure, to the remainder of December 2, 2012, and applied for the rescission of the instant seizure. However, on December 4, 2012, the remaining head of the remainder of the Republic of Korea responded to the Plaintiff on December 4, 2012, that “it is possible to release the attachment of the entire amount of the amount of the indemnity equivalent to KRW 24,071,070,070, which was already incurred until the ownership was transferred from B until May 10, 195 to May 7, 2001.”

On March 15, 2013, the Plaintiff again requested the head of the South-North Korean government to cancel the instant seizure, but on March 19, 2013, the remaining head of the South-North Korean government responded to the purport of refusing the instant seizure.

E. The Plaintiff is the Central Administrative Appeals Commission of Korea.