1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of ruling;

A. On March 1, 1965, the Defendant determined and announced the C in the Namyang-si, Namyang-si, the Gyeonggi-do Public Notice B as the river to which the C applied mutatis mutandis.

B. On June 5, 1985, the Plaintiff registered the preservation of ownership in accordance with the former Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership of Real Estate (amended by Act No. 3562, Apr. 3, 1982; hereinafter “former Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Real Estate”) with respect to D forest land 2,965 square meters (hereinafter “D land”) and E forest land 1,963 square meters (hereinafter “E land”).

C. On February 2, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a claim with the Central Land Expropriation Committee for compensation for losses equivalent to the usage fees by including each of the instant lands into a river area to which the said land was applied mutatis mutandis. However, on May 22, 2014, the Central Land Expropriation Committee rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s application for adjudication of compensation for losses on the ground that the instant land was discovered since it was incorporated into a river area, and that the river area was rarely changed.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap No. 1, 23, and 24, and the purport of whole pleading

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was not the original reservoir, but the river flow of C was changed due to the bank construction work performed between 1963 and 1974 or the bank connection work performed thereafter. Accordingly, the Plaintiff was unable to use, profit from, and dispose of each of the instant land. Accordingly, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for losses incurred therefrom. The amount of compensation is KRW 56,720,000, the difference between the value of each of the instant land and the value of each of the instant river work and the amount of compensation for losses incurred due to the river work being excluded from or at the reservoir due to the river work.

B. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion is that each of the instant land falls under the original reservoir and is new due to the implementation of the designation of river areas or bank construction works.