1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On December 20, 2005, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant agreement”) with the Defendant on December 20, 2005, setting a rental fee of KRW 5 million per year, and the rental period from August 18, 2005 to August 18, 2015, with respect to the 223 fishing grounds located in Gosa-gun (hereinafter “instant fishing ground”).

B. Goung-gun buried 3,100 public waters in the Goung-gun and constructed a tide embankment only with the high interest. From around 2005, it discharged agricultural water from the water bank inside the tide embankment for the purpose of cultivating the tide embankment.

The water released above reached the fishing ground operated by the defendant (hereinafter referred to as the "fishing ground of this case"), resulting in the impact of underwater ecosystem, and the production of the fishing ground of this case has decreased, thereby making it impossible to run the fishery business any longer.

C. Accordingly, on July 16, 2015, the defendant filed a claim for damages equivalent to the amount of fishery losses against the High Court of Seoul High Court (Seoul High Court en banc Decision 2012Na62747, which held that the defendant jointly pays the amount of KRW 1,498,065,00 to the defendant and the damages incurred therefrom (hereinafter “prior judgment”), and the above judgment became final and conclusive.

The defendant received 2,376,587,776 won from the High interest Group and the Republic of Korea the cited amount of the preceding judgment.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 5, Eul evidence 1 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the amount the Defendant received from the Republic of Korea, etc. due to the execution of a preceding judgment is compensation for damages arising from the decrease in production due to fishery activities, and thus, the Plaintiff should be attributed

Therefore, the defendant has the fishery right to the plaintiff in the amount of KRW 1,324,05,520 (hereinafter "the compensation of this case"), which constitutes damages for the portion of the fishing ground of this case.