1. The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of KRW 35,807,880 of indemnity as of February 19, 2014 against the Plaintiff is revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. B association (hereinafter “B association”) concluded a contract on October 19, 2001 and entered into an additional agreement on construction of hot spring water supply facilities as a land development recompense on February 15, 2002, in order to implement a land readjustment project in B district at the area of 225,300 square meters in Gyeongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do, D, E, Japan, to implement a land readjustment project in B district (hereinafter “monthly”) in accordance with the B tourist resort creation plan.

B. The construction works, etc. under each of the above contracts, such as construction of one pump room and the management office (hereinafter “instant building”) on the ground of 1,17.6m2 (hereinafter “instant site”) in the 1,000m2 in Chang-gun, Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “Seoul Special Metropolitan City”). The instant site was replaced by the Gyeongnam-do on February 15, 2005.

C. The Defendant imposed KRW 35,807,880 on February 19, 2014 on the ground that the Plaintiff occupied and used the instant site without permission by using the instant building from February 19, 2009 to February 18, 2014.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) D.

On April 30, 2014, the Plaintiff appealed against the instant disposition and filed an administrative appeal with the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission, but the said commission rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, 10, 11, 21, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 4, 9, 13, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion of this case is unlawful for the following reasons, and thus, should be revoked or restricted.

1. The building of this case is a facility for the supply of hot spring water in the district B and has a public nature, and the Gyeongnam-do or the defendant recognizes that the building of this case existing on the ground is being used to supply hot spring water from the time the land in this case was replaced by the Gyeongnam-do. However, objection is raised.