1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are incurred by the participation of the Intervenor.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On June 8, 2010, the Plaintiff is a person who installed a excursion ship wharf after obtaining permission from the Defendant for the occupation and use of a fishing boat for the purpose of “the excursion ship wharf for private landing” (the period of permission after the extension of the period of permission until December 31, 2018) with respect to Pyeongtaek-gun E (the area of occupation and use of 464.7 square meters; hereinafter “the instant river site”).

B. On March 3, 2009, the Defendant’s Intervenor B obtained permission for the occupation and use of a excursion ship station for the purpose of “the excursion ship wharf for the purpose of a private landing” from the Defendant for the purpose of “the occupancy and use area of 155 square meters” (the period of permission thereafter extended to December 31, 2017) and installed the excursion ship wharf at a place less than 25 meters away from the Plaintiff’s excursion ship station. The Defendant’s Intervenor C and D are the children of the Defendant’s Intervenor B and the owner of Pyeongtaek-gun G and its ground buildings adjacent to the instant river site.

C. On July 11, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for change of the occupation and use purpose of the instant river site to “the excursion ship wharf for water-related leisure business” (hereinafter “instant application”) and failed to attach the written consent of the Intervenor B.

Accordingly, on July 13, 2016, the Defendant submitted to the Plaintiff a written consent of the Intervenor B, etc. to the effect that “In the event the above application is permitted from the Intervenor B, the vested river user,” the Defendant’s rejection of the Plaintiff’s application by the former River Act (amended by Act No. 14722, Mar. 21, 2017; hereinafter the same) to the effect that it is difficult to satisfy the Plaintiff’s request by the Plaintiff and the Intervenor B at the same time.

(hereinafter referred to as "disposition of this case"). / [Grounds for recognition] The entry of Gap's 2, 4, and 5, Eul's 1, Eul's 1, Eul's 1 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1 is limited to the purpose of the existing excursion ship station.