1. The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of KRW 15,440,520 of indemnity against the Plaintiff on August 20, 2017 is revoked.

2...

Details of the disposition

The Defendant, on the ground that the Plaintiff owned a building without permission on the land B of Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant building without permission”), and occupied 81 square meters, among 86 square meters and 83 square meters, owned by Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant land”), from March 21, 2013 to August 28, 2017, the Defendant imposed KRW 15,440,520 on the Plaintiff on August 20, 2017.

(hereinafter “Disposition of this case”). 【The ground for recognition” did not have any dispute, the entry of Gap’s evidence No. 4, and the purport of the entire pleading as to the lawfulness of the disposition of this case is registered in the Plaintiff’s unauthorized building registry as having purchased the instant unauthorized building from D. However, it is merely for securing the Plaintiff’s claim against D, and it does not actually mean that the Plaintiff actually used and used the instant unauthorized building.

Therefore, the instant disposition taken on a different premise is unlawful.

Article 81 (Collection of Compensation) (1) of the Public Property-Related Acts and subordinate statutes and Commodity Management Act (1) The head of a local government shall collect an amount equivalent to 120/100 of usage fees or lease fees for public property or commodities (hereinafter referred to as "compensation") from a person who uses or benefits from public property or commodities without permission for use or profit-making, or occupies public property or commodities (including cases where he/she continues to use or profit from public property or commodities without permission for use or profit-making or loan contract after the expiration of the period of permission for use or profit-making or loan contract; hereinafter referred to

Provided, That no indemnity shall be collected in any of the following cases:

The provisions of Article 12 (1) of the Act shall apply mutatis mutandis.

1. After acquisition of the property of a person (including an heir and his/her general successor) who has paid for a reasonable price in reliance on the nominal person in the register or other public record as a legitimate owner and has acquired such property;