1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Summary of disposition;

A. On September 1, 2011, the Plaintiff concluded a loan agreement between the Defendant and the Defendant on the leased State-owned property from January 1, 201 to December 31, 201, with the size of 672 square meters and E 883 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) prior to D, as well as the size of land for factory B 470 square meters, C 874 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”).

After that, on August 2, 2016, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant the rent and overdue interest amounting to KRW 10,062,570 for the instant land.

B. On November 16, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition imposing indemnity of KRW 23,605,340 on the Plaintiff on the ground that “after the Plaintiff continued to use the instant land.” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) The imposition of State property is limited to cases where the first commencement of possession of State property starts without legal title, and is not applicable to cases where the lease contract is concluded and the possession is terminated after the lawful commencement of possession. Therefore, the instant disposition is unlawful.

On August 2, 2016, the Plaintiff paid the existing rent, thereby terminating the State-owned property loan. At that time, F, a lessee of the Plaintiff’s land, only used the instant land, and there was no fact that the Plaintiff used the instant land. Therefore, the instant disposition was unlawful as it misleads the factual basis.

(2) In order to access the Plaintiff’s land, the instant land should be used, and since the right to passage over the surrounding land is recognized, the corresponding part is not subject to civil liability, separate from civil liability, and thus, the instant disposition is unlawful.

B. (1) The Plaintiff’s possession of the instant land (A) Article 2 Subparag. 9 of the State Property Act refers to compensation.