1. The imposition of indemnity amounting to KRW 98,088,810 against the Plaintiff on October 11, 2011 shall be revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Details of disposition;

A. The Plaintiff operated a textile processing plant on the ground of 618 square meters in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and around 1992, the Defendant accepted 76 square meters of the above B land owned by the Plaintiff for the installation of sewerage (the above 76 square meters were divided into C) and installed a boundary stone and fence while performing a sewerage construction work on the D ditch owned by the State (the above 76 square meters was divided into C).

B. Around June 2006, the Plaintiff closed the above factory and installed a gas station in that place, and installed the gas station and the floor inside that area based on the above boundary stone and fence.

C. On October 11, 201, the Defendant issued the instant disposition, based on Article 15 of the Public Waters Management and Reclamation Act (hereinafter “Public Waters Act”), imposing KRW 91,92,900,90, and KRW 6,095,910,08,810, each of the compensation for public waters during the period from October 12, 2006 to October 11, 201, on the ground that the Plaintiff occupied 11,00 square meters among 9,253 square meters of land and 13 square meters of E, which are owned by the State, as the parking lot of a gas station (hereinafter “instant main part”).

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion (1) is that the disposition of this case imposing indemnity to the Plaintiff on the premise that the Plaintiff occupied the Plaintiff without permission, on the ground that the Plaintiff believed that the Plaintiff had a legitimate title to occupy the part of the instant case located inside the boundary of the Defendant’s trust and occupied it in a peaceful and public performance manner.

(2) In addition, the instant disposition also violates the principle of trust protection as it infringes on the Plaintiff’s interest that has trusted the Defendant’s public opinion expression.

(3) The key part of the instant case is a ditch which is entirely unrelated to the gas station site, and the officially announced value of each land itself has been determined. Therefore, the Defendant’s imposition of indemnity on the basis of the officially announced value of the land Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B, which is the gas station site.