1. The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of KRW 347,386,580, imposed on the Plaintiff on November 16, 2016, shall be revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. Since 1975, the Plaintiff was newly established on April 1, 1980, Guro-gu, Seoul, and was incorporated into Guro-gu with B Dong and Dong, which were belonging to Yeongdeungpo-gu.

For convenience, B and D shall be indicated as “Guro-gu” without distinction between the relevant period of time.

C Ownership a sports ground facility newly built in accordance with an urban planning project in the Dong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the neighboring state-owned land, such as the attached Form 2, is divided into 814 square meters and 119 square meters out of the same Gu F ditch (hereinafter referred to as “instant ditch”), and is occupying and using the parking lot on the ground.

B. On November 16, 2016, the Defendant issued a disposition imposing an occupation fee of KRW 347,386,580 (as to the period from April 22, 2010 to October 31, 2016) pursuant to the main text of Article 13(1) of the former Public Waters Management and Reclamation Act (amended by Act No. 14726, Mar. 21, 2017; hereinafter “Public Waters Act”) on the ground that the Plaintiff occupied and used the ditches of this case without an occupation and use permit (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 12 and 15, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s instant disposition should be revoked on the ground that it is unlawful for the following reasons.

1) The Plaintiff, as an executor of an urban planning project under the former Urban Planning Act, obtained authorization of the implementation plan for the said project from the Seoul Special Metropolitan City. Since the contents of the said implementation plan include the contents on the possession and use of the said ditches, the occupation and use fees for the said ditches were exempted pursuant to Article 83(4) of the former Urban Planning Act. In addition, the said ditches are discontinued for public use following the implementation of an urban planning project and do not constitute public waters any longer. Therefore, the occupation and use fees for the said ditches cannot be imposed under the Public Waters Act

3. The Seoul Special Metropolitan City.