1. On May 1, 2019, the Defendant’s right to claim the withdrawal of deposit money of KRW 3,383,330 deposited by the Bank No. 1322 in 2019.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. As an implementer of “B road construction works and secondary vehicles”, the Defendant (Seoul District Office) admitted a concrete package of 150 square meters, which is a water obstacle to the ground level of 82.9 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) located in the said project district, into the Central Land Expropriation Committee (hereinafter “instant obstacles”).

B. On May 1, 2019, the Defendant deposited the cause of deposit as the Bank No. 1322 of 2019 to the owner upon the ruling of the Central Land Expropriation Committee on the land expropriation of the obstacles of this case. However, although the Defendant intended to pay the amount of the ruling to the owner, it is impossible to provide the inmate with unknown whereabouts, and thus, deposit it.

“The purpose of this case’s deposit money is indicated as “the identity of the inmate” and deposited KRW 3,383,330 as an obstacle to the deposit column (hereinafter “the deposit money”).

On the request of the Plaintiff at spring around 2008, D, a Siberter of the Plaintiff, carried out a concrete package of 150 square meters on the instant land, planted 2 glue tree, and did not have a separate title to such act.

【Fact-finding without a dispute over the basis of recognition】 Facts, Gap evidence of subparagraphs 1 through 3, Eul evidence of subparagraphs 1 through 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, since the obstacles of this case were consistent with the land of this case, the plaintiff acquired the ownership of the obstacles of this case around spring of 2008, which was at the time when the plaintiff met as above.

Therefore, where the Defendant deposited the instant deposited money with the compensation for the expropriation of the obstacles, the Plaintiff has the right to claim the payment of the deposited money, and the operator of the project deposited the compensation money on the grounds of the absolute uncertainty of the person entitled to receive the compensation for the expropriation, the lawsuit seeking confirmation of the right to claim the payment of deposited money against the operator is absolutely unreasonable and legal dispute surrounding the payment of deposited money.