1. The part of the revocation of the disposition demanding a correction of land category among the lawsuit in this case shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the instant land.

B. During the process of computerization of cadastral map between 2004 and 2005, the Defendant discovered that the land category of the instant land in the previous cadastral map was indicated as a building site, and corrected it as a “pre-round” according to the land cadastre statement.

(hereinafter “Correction of land category”). C.

On April 25, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application to change the land category to a large one, because the land category of the instant land was changed to a large one at the time when it cannot be known.

On April 30, 2013, the Defendant: (a) notified the Plaintiff on April 30, 2013 that the land category of the instant land was “former”; (b) there was no change in the land category; and (c) provided that the land category in the previous cadastral map was corrected due to the mistake; and (d) returned the Plaintiff’s application on the ground that the Plaintiff’s application should be accompanied by the documents to be submitted under Article 84 of the Enforcement Rule of the Act on Land Survey, Waterway

(hereinafter “instant return disposition”).