1. The Defendant’s disposition of imposing indemnity amounting to KRW 36,104,150, which the Plaintiff rendered on February 26, 2016, shall be revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 30, 2007, the registration of preservation of ownership (hereinafter “registration of preservation of ownership”) was completed in the name of the Republic of Korea on March 30, 2007 with respect to the land of 704 square meters in Nam-si, Namyang-si (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On February 26, 2016, the Defendant issued a disposition imposing KRW 36,104,150 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff occupied and used the instant land, which is State property, for the purpose of factory site without a loan agreement, from September 15, 2010 to September 14, 2015 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) pursuant to Article 72 of the State Property Act and Article 71 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that this case’s land was assessed against C, and thus, the registration of ownership preservation falls under the registration of invalidity of cause, and thus, Korea is not the owner of the instant land.

Rather, since D, the decedent, purchased the instant land or acquired prescription, the Plaintiff has the right to possess the instant land.

Nevertheless, the instant disposition made by the Defendant on a different premise is unlawful.

B. Determination 1) According to Article 2 subparag. 1 and 9 of the State Property Act and Article 72 of the State Property Act, indemnity under Article 72 of the State Property Act refers to an amount imposed on an occupant without permission, such as the person who used, profited from, or occupied State property owned by the State without permission for use or loan contract. Therefore, in order to impose indemnity on the land of this case, the land of this case must be owned by the State. 2) In full view of each entry of evidence No. 12, evidence No. 12, and evidence No. 13, No. 13, the entire purport of the pleadings is taken into account, the land investigation division prepared by the Joseon General Government Department under the Decree on the Land Survey conducted during the Japanese Occupation Period (former 2 years) around Oct. 1, 1913, the land investigation division prepared by the Joseon General Government Department under the Decree on the Land Survey conducted during the Japanese Occupation Period (former 2