1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

The disposition of imposition of indemnity under Article 72 (1) of the State Properties Act is an administrative disposition imposed on a person who uses any State property without permission, and under Article 73 (2) of the same Act, where a person who uses any State property without permission fails to pay indemnity, the Office of Administration shall delegate it to the head of the competent tax office or the head of the competent local government so that it may collect indemnity pursuant to the provisions of the National Tax Collection Act on the disposition of arrears. Thus, the claim of indemnity based on the disposition of imposition

(See Supreme Court Decision 200Da28568 Decided November 24, 2000. Regarding this case, the Plaintiff was entrusted by the office of general administration in charge of the affairs pertaining to state property pursuant to the State Property Act with the affairs pertaining to the management and disposal of B large scale B large scale B large scale 17 square meters and C large scale 43 square meters (hereinafter “each land of this case”) and the Defendant imposed indemnity equivalent to the period from March 1, 2005 to December 31, 2008 on the ground that the Defendant occupied and used each land of this case without permission. The Plaintiff sought the payment of such indemnity as the lawsuit of this case, a civil suit.

Therefore, since the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, it is decided to dismiss it. It is so decided as per Disposition.