1. From August 28, 2015, the Plaintiff’s royalty for the use of B water zone facilities (sea route, gambling ground, and boat president) is KRW 77,368,89,000.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 2, 2010, the chief of a regional maritime affairs and fisheries office under the Defendant-based regional maritime affairs and fisheries office (hereinafter “the chief of a regional maritime affairs and fisheries office”) publicly announced the project operator’s selection of a non-management authority’s harbor project operator with respect to the dredging project on a dredging scale of 2,860,000 cubic meters (hereinafter “instant project”). On April 24, 2010, the Plaintiff was selected as the project operator.

B. On June 2010, the Plaintiff filed an application with the head of the Port and Fisheries Administration for permission to implement harbor works concerning the instant project pursuant to Article 9(2) of the former Harbor Act (amended by Act No. 11594, Dec. 18, 2012; hereinafter the same shall apply). On June 22, 2010, the Administrator of the Port and Fisheries Administration granted the Plaintiff permission to implement harbor works concerning the instant project with respect to the non-management authority.

C. On August 2010, the Plaintiff established and submitted a detailed implementation plan for the instant construction project to the head of the Korea Coast Guard pursuant to Article 10(1) of the former Harbor Act. On September 8, 2010, the head of the Korea Coast Guard approved the Plaintiff’s implementation plan for the instant construction project with respect to the non-management authority.

(hereinafter “instant implementation plan”). D.

On October 7, 2010, the Plaintiff started the instant construction work, and around August 27, 2012, B nearby “C” (hereinafter “C”) requested the Administrator of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Office to compensate for losses and to prepare measures to prevent marine pollution, on the grounds that the Plaintiff’s status was “the status of the construction of the instant case was previously one year prior to the date of the construction of the instant case, with the concentration and malodor spread in D coastal sea, causing enormous losses to sexual fishing operation.”

E. On September 13, 2012, the Plaintiff submitted an opinion to the Commissioner of the Port and Fisheries Administration to temporarily suspend construction to the port and port to the port of ocean, and ② continue to hold an interview with C, and ③ endeavor to prevent the spread of similar structures, such as adjustment of the intensity of construction.