The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2

A. Relevant statutes and issues (1) Article 19(1) of the former Act on Special Measures for the Construction, etc. of Public Rental Housing (wholly amended by Act No. 9511, Mar. 20, 2009; hereinafter “former Act on the Construction of Public Rental Housing”) provides that Article 65 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act shall apply to the attribution of ownership in cases where an industrial complex development project operator newly installs public facilities (excluding parking lots and playgrounds) or installs facilities replacing existing public facilities under Article 2(13) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act (hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”). In such cases, an “administrative agency” shall be deemed an “industrial complex developer” under this Act.

Article 2 subparag. 13 of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act (amended by Act No. 11922, Jul. 16, 2013; hereinafter the same) defines “public facilities” as “road, railroad, tap water, and other facilities for public use prescribed by Presidential Decree” and Article 4 subparag. 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, upon delegation, provides for “rivers” and “ditch” as public facilities prescribed by Presidential Decree.

In addition, Article 65 (1) of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act provides that where a person who has obtained permission for development is an administrative agency, where a person who has obtained permission for development installs new public facilities or public facilities replacing existing public facilities, notwithstanding the State Property Act and the Public Property and Commodity Management Act, the newly installed public facilities shall gratuitously vest in the management agency to manage the facilities, and the existing public facilities shall gratuitously vest in

(2) The key issue of the instant case is the gratuitous reversion of each of the instant land, which is the State property located within the project zone of the complex development project, as at the time approval of the instant execution plan was granted ( December 29, 2005).