1. All plaintiffs' lawsuits are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. The plaintiffs asserted that they were co-owners of 213 square meters in Seongbuk-gu Seoul P prior to Seoul (hereinafter "the land in this case"). The defendant set up an interior circular road on the land in this case and run a high level above the above land. The defendant occupied and used the above land without permission by the defendant, as he occupied and used the above land without permission, on the ground that the defendant is obliged to compensate the plaintiffs for losses pursuant to Article 76 of the River Act.

2. In a case where an ex officio determination as to the legitimacy of the lawsuit of this case, the owner of the land who suffered loss due to the incorporation of the land into the river area of a river to which the provisions of this case apply mutatis mutandis shall consult with the river management agency pursuant to the provisions of Article 74 of the River Act, and where such consultation is not reached or it is impossible to hold such consultation, a request for adjudication to the competent Land Tribunal shall be filed, and if such adjudication is not an agreement, the compensation can only be made according to the result by filing an administrative litigation against the competent

In light of the above legal principles, there is no evidence to support that the Plaintiffs filed an application for adjudication of expropriation with respect to the instant land under the River Act, or completed other lawful procedures for adjudication, and thus, the instant lawsuit is unlawful as it is immediately claimed by the Plaintiffs without going through adjudication procedures, without going through adjudication procedures.

3. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices, since the plaintiffs' lawsuit of this case is unlawful.