1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. From around 2002, the Plaintiff: (a) leased 3,234.9 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, the Defendant owned by the Defendant; and (b) installed 6 Hashes six dong (hereinafter “instant river”) and 2 gushes (hereinafter “instant house”); and (c) cultivated crops.

B. Around 2010, the lease contract for the instant land was terminated between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff around February 2010 and acquired the said amount.

C. Since then, the Defendant had F cultivate the instant land under the name of E, which was a transfer of the Chapter, and had F cultivate it.

When the instant land was incorporated into public land for the project to remodel G District Farmland, the Korea Rural Community Corporation appraised the amount of compensation on March 25, 2010 to set the compensation, which was set at KRW 27,532,980 for the instant land (the amount of rental loss in KRW 9,385,790), KRW 41,350,00 for obstacles (the amount of rental loss), KRW 2,600,00 for the official compensation.

E. On July 9, 2010, E, the Defendant’s representative, entered into a water indemnity agreement with the Korea Rural Community Corporation, which covers KRW 4,1350,00,000 as compensation for the instant cargo, and KRW 2,60,000 as compensation for the instant cargo. Accordingly, E was paid KRW 4,395,00 as compensation. Of the amount of agricultural loss for the instant land, KRW 9,385,790 as compensation was paid.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 and 2 evidence 1 to 4, Gap evidence 3-1, 2, Gap evidence 7, Eul evidence 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion No. 1 that the sales contract was concluded between the two parties with respect to the instant House and Government.

② Even if the Defendant entered into a contract, the Plaintiff did not have a title to the Plaintiff for the purpose of acquiring compensation, and the Plaintiff was an obstacle.