1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

The Plaintiff owns the building B-dong Seoul Dongdaemun-gu (hereinafter referred to as “B-dong”) C (hereinafter referred to as “instant building”).

The Defendant imposed an indemnity of KRW 31,019,30 on the Plaintiff on December 30, 2016, on the ground that the Plaintiff occupied 22.3 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) from among D roads adjoining the instant building from September 11, 2014 to November 11, 2016.

(2) A project implementer, who promoted an urban environment rearrangement project (hereinafter “instant project”), in the first place of the instant building, did not have any dispute with the Defendant, described in the evidence Nos. 1 and 4 (including the Serial No. 1) and the purport of the entire pleadings, and the purport of the instant disposition, as to the legitimacy of the disposition of this case as to April 5, 2015, the Plaintiff removed the parts of the fireproof and stairs of the instant building, which possessed the instant land, and the area occupied by the Plaintiff at the time does not reach 22.3 square meters. (2) A project implementer agreed with the Defendant that the Defendant will no longer impose indemnity on an occupant of the instant building within the instant project zone, and paid the Defendant an indemnity of KRW 1 billion to the Defendant without permission.

Meanwhile, since the instant building was included in the instant project site and was excluded from around June 16, 2016, the Defendant cannot impose indemnity on the Plaintiff from September 11, 2014 to June 16, 2016.

Judgment

1) According to the statements or videos in the evidence Nos. 3 through 6, the Plaintiff may recognize that the Plaintiff occupied the instant building by installing a fireproofs and stairs of the instant building from September 11, 2014 to November 11, 2016. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion on this part is without merit. 2) The fact that the instant building was included in the instant building site, and was excluded from the Seoul Special Metropolitan City NotificationF on June 16, 2016 does not conflict between the parties, but further, the operator of the instant project agreements with the Defendant on the Plaintiff’s assertion.