1. Defendant B’s KRW 150,837,512 as well as 5% per annum from November 6, 2014 to July 23, 2015 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The network D (hereinafter “the deceased”) is the south of the Defendant B, and the Defendant C is the south of the Defendant B, and the Plaintiff is the wife of the deceased and the Defendant B.

B. The Defendant B buried the public waters of Taean-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and moved to Seoul around 1986 after cultivating Bori-ri in the above reclaimed land. The Defendant C also moved to Seoul around that time.

C. Since around 1986, the deceased cultivated the above reclaimed land illegally while occupying it, and around 2003, the Republic of Korea arranged the above reclaimed land and imposed a charge for compelling the deceased to compel execution.

After paying enforcement fines, the Deceased concluded a loan agreement on the State-owned property with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet with the Republic of Korea (hereinafter “instant real estate”) from around that time, and cultivated rice in the said real estate.

As the Deceased died on June 28, 2011, the Plaintiff succeeded to the status of the Deceased and entered into a loan agreement on July 7, 201 with respect to the instant real estate between the Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea as of December 31, 2013, and cultivated rice in the said real estate.

E. On January 1, 2014, the Plaintiff concluded a loan agreement with the State-owned property loan agreement with the annual rent of KRW 20,905,940, and the loan period until December 31, 2018 on the purpose of using the instant real estate for farming. On the same day, the Plaintiff paid the rent of KRW 20,905,940 for the year 2014.

F. Meanwhile, on October 22, 2013, Defendant B sent to the Plaintiff a certificate of content verifying the right to cultivate the instant real estate, and returned home around 2014.

G. On March 29, 2014, Defendant B mobilized F and G from the instant real estate on March 29, 2014, and carried out Roteral work. Defendant B reported to the police and dispatched the police officer to the said site.

However, even after the fact, Defendant B continued to work in the street and completed the reproduction of the real estate in this case by creating a bar.

【Ground of recognition】 There is no dispute, Gap Nos. 1, 2, 5.