The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Article 2 (1) of the Addenda to the River Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Revised River Act") provides that the management agency shall compensate for the loss of the land which became a river area due to the river basin before December 31, 1984, the enforcement date of the amended River Act, and the land which was excluded from the State due to the enforcement of the former River Act (wholly amended by Act No. 2292, Jan. 19, 1971). Article 2 of the Act on Special Measures for the Compensation, etc. for Land Incorporated into a River shall provide that the management agency shall compensate for the loss thereof, and Article 2 of the Act on Special Measures for the Compensation for Land Incorporated into a River shall be provided that the Special Metropolitan City Mayor, Metropolitan City Mayor, or Do governor shall compensate for the loss thereof if the claim for compensation has not been terminated due to the expiration of the extinctive prescription period under Article 3 of the Act on Special Measures for the Compensation for Land Incorporated into a River under subparagraph 2 of the same Article before the enforcement date of the amended River Act (Act No. 292, where the land becomes the river Act before the enforcement date of the Act;

The right to claim compensation for losses under the above provisions has been incorporated into a river area in accordance with the previous provisions of the River Act itself, but there is no compensation provision or the right to claim compensation has not been paid compensation due to extinction of prescription, the State shall compensate for losses in terms of reflective consideration and remedy for the rights of the people.