1. The Defendant’s imposition of KRW 45,309,80 of indemnity against the Plaintiff on December 14, 2018 shall be revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Summary of disposition;

A. On December 199, the Plaintiff leased the said land to C, who sells fishing products, as the owner of the land in Changwon-gu, Changwon-si, and around December 199.

However, on March 24, 2014, the above C discontinued a general restaurant (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) with the trade name “D” on May 16, 2014.

B. On December 14, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition of imposition of KRW 45,309,80 of the indemnity (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff occupied and used the land of KRW 232 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) located in the vicinity of the instant restaurant from around November 2013, for the purpose of the instant restaurant parking lot, etc.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 7, 8, and 11, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was unlawful in deeming that there was no fact that the Plaintiff occupied and used the instant land.

(b) Determination (1) Under the State Property Act, the term "compensation" means an amount imposed on a person who uses, benefits from or occupies State property without permission for use or loan contract, or a person who uses, benefits from or occupies State property without permission for use or loan contract after the expiration

Therefore, in order to impose the above indemnity, it should be presumed that the state property was occupied and used as profit.

(2) Therefore, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the health zone, Gap evidence Nos. 9, Eul evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 5, 6, 10, and 12 (including virtual numbers), and Eul evidence Nos. 2, are as follows: <1> The land of this case is a vacant machine accessible to many and unspecified persons, which is connected to the second line road, and is linked to the second line road, and the land of this case is not directly connected to the site of this case, but between the second line roads.