beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On March 22, 2010, the expropriation-si, as a project implementer of the “use B construction project,” which is an urban planning facility project, accepted 2,327 square meters prior to the wife population C (hereinafter “instant land”) located in the said project site, which was owned by the Plaintiff, on April 14, 201, and each of the instant housing units 15.30 square meters of the above land owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant housing”).
B. The Defendant’s disposition 1) out of the instant land from April 14, 201 to May 2012, 201, the instant housing site of 155.30 square meters and the instant housing (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant public property”).
(2) On July 16, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the disposition of imposing indemnities of KRW 12,008,430 on the ground that he/she occupied or used the land without permission for use or profit-making or loan contract (amended by Act No. 12201, Jan. 7, 2014) pursuant to Article 81(1) of the former Public Property and Commodity Management Act (amended by Act No. 12201, Jan. 7, 2014). (2) The Plaintiff filed an objection against the disposition of imposing indemnities of KRW 12,08,430, Sept. 6, 2012. The Defendant imposed indemnity of KRW 50/100 to KRW 6,03,550 (hereinafter “previous disposition”).
(3) On October 2, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of the previous disposition with the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission, and the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling that “The indemnity for the possession and use of the instant public property from April 14, 201 to December 6, 2011 is reasonable to impose on the Plaintiff, but the indemnity for the possession and use of the instant public property from December 7, 2011 to May 31, 2012 ought to be imposed on the Plaintiff’s children, and thus, the previous disposition is revoked on the ground that the period of the Plaintiff’s occupancy and use was erroneously calculated and unlawful” (hereinafter “instant ruling”).
4. The defendant shall make the previous dispositions on April 2014.