1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of 119.00 square meters of neighborhood living facilities 119.00 square meters (hereinafter below) around the 198.6 square meters above the 198.6 square meters above the land in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

The instant building was constructed on June 12, 1995, as a combination with the 127.5 square meters and 64.5 square meters of 127.5 square meters of the 1st floor related to the 2nd floor of a light 353.9 square meters above the instant building, and the Plaintiff purchased the entire automobile industry facilities, including the instant building, from D and completed the registration of ownership transfer on June 11, 1998.

B. The Plaintiff operated the automobile maintenance business in the instant building and the instant building in Songpa-gu Seoul Building with the trade name called “stock company E-automobile maintenance business company”. At the time of Nonparty F and G sharing one-half shares of each of the shares of Nonparty F and G at the time of Nonparty F, Songpa-gu Seoul Building’s site for the instant building, the land for the instant automobile facilities was leased from F and G, with the relationship where Nonparty F and G shared one-half shares.

C. On October 30, 2014, the Defendant: (a) notified that the instant building was occupied by 25.8 square meters in Songpa-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City HW large 552.9 square meters (hereinafter the instant land allotted in recompense for development outlay), which is State property owned by Seoul; (b) as the managing authority of the instant land allotted in recompense for development outlay, the Defendant was scheduled to impose indemnity; (c) on January 8, 2015, the Defendant imposed KRW 21,406,840 for the occupancy period from December 22, 2009 to December 21, 2014 (the instant disposition was conducted under the following).

On June 1, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an objection to review, and the Administrative Appeals Commission rendered a ruling revoking KRW 189,410 of the indemnity for the period from December 22, 2009 to January 7, 2010, which was five years retroactively from the date of disposition, among the disposition imposing indemnity on the Defendant on January 8, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence of subparagraphs 1 through 6, Eul evidence of subparagraphs 1 through 8, the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the disposition

A. The plaintiff's assertion is that the automobile industry building, including the building of this case, from D on June 11, 1998.