1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's main claim is dismissed.

3. The plaintiff as added by this court.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, as the owner of B forest land B, 11,842 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”), concluded a loan agreement with the Defendant, setting the loan period from September 18, 1997 to August 31, 2002, for the purpose of cultivating mountainous districts and trees with respect to the instant land, around 1997.

B. From August 10, 201 to about 40 days, the Defendant, without permission for development activities, newly constructed a building on the ground of the attached Form No. A, B, C, D, and A, part of the instant land connected each point of which is 142 square meters in sequence, with the indication of the attached Form No. 1, B, C, D, and A among the instant land (hereinafter “instant building”).

C. Since March 2002, the Defendant filed an application for permission to engage in development activities with respect to 580 square meters among the instant land, and around April 6, 2002, the Suwon State Forest Office was a newly constructed illegal building without permission to engage in development activities. However, since it is necessary for the management of the leased land, it was sent at the time of harmony with the Council to the effect that “the State agrees to the permission on the condition of voluntary removal and restoration if it is required to remove the leased land,” and on April 29, 2002, the Seosung City was permitted to engage in development activities by attaching the following conditions of permission.

Conditions of License

6. If the State requests removal of a manager in a state forest, or if the lease or use permit is revoked, the manager shall voluntarily remove or restore the site to the original state, and the expenses necessary therefor shall be borne by the person who has given the permit.

As the right to loan of the instant land was transferred and acquired twice, the status as a lender, including the right and obligation relating to the instant building, was transferred in sequence to C on September 1, 2002, and D on September 1, 2012. The Plaintiff granted permission for the transfer of each of the above lending rights, while the lease period was extended until December 31, 2016.

E. On September 9, 2015, the Plaintiff managed state forests on the ground that it violated D’s purpose of lending.