1. The Defendant’s KRW 56,810,450 for the Plaintiff and KRW 6% per annum from January 12, 2013 to December 30, 2013.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 23, 2007, the head of Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government announced the approval for the implementation of the urban environment rearrangement project in Zone 2 of Jongno-gu Seoul Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Zone 2 as the rearrangement zone (hereinafter “instant rearrangement zone”) where the 29-dong of Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant site”) including the 6-4m2 and 121.4m2 (hereinafter “instant site”), which is owned by the Defendant, as the rearrangement zone (hereinafter “instant rearrangement zone”); and on August 27, 2010, the head of Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government changed the project implementer to the Plaintiff.

B. From September 8, 2010, the Plaintiff occupied the instant site in the instant improvement zone, and excavated cultural heritage pursuant to the Act on the Protection and Inspection of Buried Cultural Heritage.

C. On July 1, 2012, the Defendant entrusted the Korea Asset Management Corporation with the management and disposal of public property owned by the Defendant, including the instant site which is general property.

Around December 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant to purchase the instant site at KRW 4,786,018,300, and around January 2013, the said purchase price was changed to KRW 4,086,780,000.

E. On January 8, 2013, the Korea Asset Management Corporation notified the Plaintiff that the instant site was occupied and used from September 8, 2010 to January 10, 2013, and that the Plaintiff would pay rent KRW 56,810,450 (including value-added tax; hereinafter “instant rent”) calculated pursuant to Article 31 of the Enforcement Decree of the Public Property and Commodity Management Act (hereinafter “Public Property Act”).

F. On January 11, 2013, the Plaintiff reserved an objection to the Defendant and paid KRW 56,810,450 of the instant loan charges to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 7 (including a provisional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion and the Defendant did not have concluded a valid loan agreement on the instant land, and the Plaintiff obtained authorization to implement the instant project.