1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On February 1, 1972, the land category of B forest No. 6,774 was changed to a bank on February 1, 1972. On November 10, 1988, Guri-si, B bank No. 6,774 was divided into C bank No. 6,097 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) and B bank No. 16,296 square meters.

B. On December 22, 1978, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of the Plaintiff, his father, on the Guri-si B bank 6,774, and on the instant land, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of the Plaintiff on September 18, 1989.

C. On the other hand, since the 1960s, farmland in the part of a branch where E was combined with the Han River every year, including the Guri-si B forest No. 6,774, was habitually damaged every year, residents living in the Japan filed a petition with the defendant Gyeonggi-do, etc. to construct a bank to prevent habitual damage from flood damage around 1964.

On March 1, 1965, the Governor of the Gyeonggi-do designated E as the river to which Gyeonggi-do announced publicly, mutatis mutandis, and publicly announced the name and section thereof, and the defendant Gyeonggi-do commenced the Han River and E Embankment (hereinafter referred to as the “instant bank construction”) around October 1967 and completed it on February 24, 1971.

The part of the instant land in Guri-si B forest No. 6774 was incorporated into the Han River site due to the instant bank construction project.

E. The Plaintiff filed an application with the Central Land Expropriation Committee (hereinafter “Defendant Committee”) for adjudication seeking compensation for losses arising from the Act on Special Measures for Compensation, etc. for Land Incorporated into the River (hereinafter “Special Measures Act”). However, on November 20, 2014, the Defendant Committee rejected the Plaintiff’s application for adjudication (hereinafter “instant adjudication”) on the ground that “an application for adjudication for adjudication of compensation for losses should be based on a legitimate owner’s claim, but it is not clear whether the instant land is a legitimate claimant due to its dispute over the compensation and ownership.”

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 3-1, 2, and Gap.