1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. In around 194, the Plaintiff obtained permission to occupy and use a river site of 785 square meters and C river of 51,524 square meters (hereinafter “the instant river site”) from the Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si (hereinafter “the instant river site”). Around December 16, 2002, the Plaintiff obtained permission to occupy and use a river for the purpose of farming business from the relevant management agency, and obtained permission to extend the occupancy and use period from January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2008 (hereinafter “the instant permission to occupy and use a river”).

B. In addition, on April 12, 2003, the Plaintiff obtained permission from the Kimpo-ro to extend the period of permission for inland fisheries from April 12, 2003 to December 31, 2008 (hereinafter “instant inland fisheries permission”).

C. The Plaintiff filed an application for extension of the period of occupation and use of the instant river site with Kimpo-si Mayor at the time of expiration of the period of occupation and use permission. However, on February 4, 2009, Kimpo-po-si, including the said river site, the Plaintiff returned the said application on the grounds that permission for extension of occupation and use of the river site was restricted by promoting ecological exploration projects for park development on the river site

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Defendant asserts to the effect that, although the Plaintiff filed an administrative lawsuit against the Kimpo-si in Incheon District Court 2009Guhap1321 seeking revocation of the return of the permission for occupancy and use of rivers of this case, the claim was dismissed. In the appellate court (Seoul High Court 2010Nu6535) and the appellate court (Seoul High Court 2010du21624), since both appeals and appeals were dismissed and the judgment of the first instance court against the Defendant became final and conclusive, filing a lawsuit claiming return of unjust enrichment in relation to the permission for occupancy and use of the river of this case against the Defendant, the instant claim is a civil lawsuit seeking return of unjust enrichment against the Defendant, which is separate from the above administrative litigation against the Kimpo-si market.