1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. From January 1, 1984 to February 1, 1988, the Plaintiff buried public waters equivalent to the size of B land 19,494 square meters and G land 578 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “land number”) prior to subdivision without obtaining a license under Article 4 of the former Public Waters Reclamation Act (amended by Act No. 3901, Dec. 31, 1986; hereinafter the same shall apply).

On October 27, 1986, the Plaintiff applied for exemption from the duty to restore public waters to Jeonnam-do Governor. On November 6, 1986, Jeonnam-do Governor exempted the Plaintiff from the duty to restore public waters on condition that it nationalizes B and G land before subdivision pursuant to Article 26(2) and (3) of the former Public Waters Reclamation Act.

B. On November 30, 1989 to December 12, 1989, the Republic of Korea abolished illegal reclaimed land including B and G land before division at the request of the Defendant, and divided it into miscellaneous property pursuant to Article 30 of the former State Property Act (amended by Act No. 9401, Jan. 30, 2009; hereinafter the same), and concluded a transfer contract with the Defendant on December 30, 1989.

Accordingly, on October 25, 1989, the Republic of Korea completed the registration of ownership preservation on B and G land before the division, and on January 22, 1990, completed the registration of ownership transfer based on the transfer under the name of the defendant.

B The land was subsequently divided and merged as follows:

(A) On October 8, 1989, a parcel number B and C were added to each of the instant lands (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”). On October 25, 1989, the size of the partitioned area (size) on October 5, 1996, the size B 19,494, 14, 664, 3,958 B 5,699 E 5,07 C 1,261, 261, 3,561 F3,563,563,569,5693,569,54,56914,555,558 as of October 28, 201.

D

C. On March 1992, the Plaintiff entered into a loan agreement with the Defendant on the part including each of the instant land (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”) and occupied each of the instant land.