2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

A. After the outbreak of the Korean War, the police units in the West-west and each local police unit in the area south-west were repeating out of the People's Republic of Korea. The People's Republic of Korea occupied Jindo-gun on August 1950. On July 1950, the People's Republic of Korea occupied Jindo-gun on the land adjacent to Jindo-gun and Chungcheongnam-do, and on the arrival of the People's Republic of Korea on the land adjacent to Jindo-gun, the people's forces of Jindo-gun and Jindo-do participated in the attack jointly with the People's Republic of Korea. At the time of occupation of the People's Republic of Korea, the People's Commission was established in the area south-west-gun, the People's Commission was established in the area of the People's Republic of Korea, and in particular, the People's Republic of Korea and the following forces made a sacrifice for the personnel affairs of the Do-gun and the Do-do on a large scale.

B. On September 1950, the United Nations Armed Forces: (a) retired from the police station of the People’s Republic of Korea in the area where the police station occupied the area south of the west-west, and occupied the area of Seoul; (b) on September 9, 1950, the force of the People’s Republic of Korea and the force of the police station that occupied the area of the west-west. The police officer, who recovered from the above area, started to color the suspect of the occupation of the People’s Republic of Korea since the early police officer on October 1950; and (c) the residents arrested or surrendered from the police station of the area as the suspect of the west-gun, were sacricked or detained in the prison through a trial.

C. The deceased non-party 1 was led to the police and was detained in Jindo Police Station on November 10, 1950 on the ground that he was present at the lag People's Trial after his clothes, and was missing after being towed to the police on November 10, 1950. The deceased non-party 2 was involved in the police after his clothes and was detained in the police station on the charge of his sub-Gun, and was detained in the police station on October 24, 1950.

D. On November 30, 2006, the Committee for the Settlement of History established pursuant to the Framework Act on the Settlement of History for the Truth and Reconciliation (hereinafter “Reconciliation Committee”) received an application for the investigation of the truth about the civilian sacrifice case that occurred in Jindo-gun from April 2007 to February 2, 2009, the applicant investigation, witness investigation, and on-site investigation were conducted. As a result, the Committee for the Settlement of History in the past was determined to confirm the death of the deceased Non-party 1 and Non-Party 2 (hereinafter “the deceased”) as the victims related to the civilian sacrifice case in Jindo-gun, the deceased Non-Party 1 was presumed to have died on November 1, 1950 without complying with lawful procedures, and the deceased Non-Party 2 was dead on October 24, 1950.

In addition, the Korean War Mediation Committee recommended that the state should be responsible for the above decision, and that the state should be officially sentenced to the death of the victims including the bereaved family members of the victims, that the government should conduct memorial projects for victims, and that the family members should correct the wrong official records such as family relations registers when they wish to do so, and that they conduct human rights education such as mandatory education on domestic law and international law related to the protection of civilians in the war against the military police officers.

E. The deceased Nonparty 1 and his wife Nonparty 11 were Plaintiff 1, 2, 5, and deceased on September 24, 2010. The deceased Nonparty 11 died on September 23, 2004. At the time of the deceased Nonparty 11’s death, the deceased spouse is Nonparty 12, and Plaintiff 3 and 4 were born between the former wife and Nonparty 13.

The deceased non-party 2 was the deceased non-party 14 and 15's south, and at the time of the deceased non-party 2's death, Nonparty 16, the deceased non-party 16, the son of the deceased non-party 16, and the deceased non-party 17, the wife of the deceased non-party 18. The deceased on November 7, 1965, and the deceased non-party 15 died on July 18, 197. The deceased between the deceased non-party 2 and his wife of the deceased non-party 19 was the plaintiff 6 and 7. The plaintiff 6 was married on October 9, 1968, and the deceased non-party 19 on October 5, 196.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 15 (including provisional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Establishment of liability for damages;

A. According to the above facts, it is reasonable to view that police officers belonging to the Jindo Police Station under the defendant died of the deceased without due process and infringed the right to a trial in accordance with due process, which is the fundamental rights of the people guaranteed by the Constitution, by living the deceased without any justifiable reason, and that the deceased and their bereaved family members suffered mental pain. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the defendant has a duty to compensate the deceased and their bereaved family members for damages caused by the above mental suffering due to a public official's unlawful act.

B. On this ground, the defendant asserts that the decision of the past reorganization committee is based on the professional evidence, so it cannot be recognized that the defendant is liable for damages to the deceased and their bereaved family members by judging the deceased as the victim of the case of sacrifice by Jindo-gun solely based on these evidence.

However, the case of sacrifice by the civilian of Jindo-gun is a case of murdered without due process because many victims were collectively and systematically connected during the national emergency period by the police or by the state authority, such as the military personnel, and in the process, there were many cases where the bereaved family did not specifically know about the victims' death or the causes of death, etc., and it is difficult for the bereaved family members to obtain objective evidence after the lapse of a long time from the time of the case. Furthermore, considering the social and political circumstances of the deceased, the social disadvantage that the bereaved family members would have to receive as the deceased's family members in Korea and after the time of the case and after the case, and the social disadvantage that the deceased would have to receive as the deceased's family members in political circumstances, unless the defendant has a separate record on the case of sacrifice by the civilian of Jindo-gun-gun, it is inevitable for the bereaved family or witness to depend on the deceased's statement unless the defendant has a separate record on the case of sacrifice by the bereaved family or witness. If the past management committee established recognizing such problem and trusted the deceased's statement of the bereaved family members or witness, it should be justified.

Therefore, solely on the basis of the expert evidence, the circumstance that the deceased cannot be viewed as a victim of the Jindo National Reporting Federation case, or the defendant's and the plaintiffs cannot be held liable for damages. Thus, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

3. Judgment on the defendant's defense of extinctive prescription

A. The defendant's defense of extinctive prescription

The defendant raises a defense that the statute of limitations has expired since three years have passed since the date when the plaintiffs became aware of the damage and the perpetrator, or ten years have passed since the illegal act was committed.

B. Determination

The facts of the instant lawsuit brought on February 14, 2012, which was far more than 10 years after the Deceased’s death on November 1, 1950 and October 24, 1950, are apparent in the record.

However, the exercise of a debtor's right of defense based on the statute of limitations is governed by the principle of good faith and the prohibition of abuse of rights, which are the major principles of our civil law. Thus, in special circumstances where the creditor was objectively unable to exercise his/her right, there was a serious obstacle to protecting the creditor, and there is a high need to protect the creditor, and there are other creditors under the same conditions where the refusal to perform the obligation is remarkably unfair or unfair, it is not permissible for the debtor to claim the completion of the statute of limitations as abuse of rights against the principle of good faith (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Da103950, Jan. 13, 201).

It is difficult for the plaintiffs to confirm the existence of the right to claim damages in a timely manner without the judgment of the judicial authority because the illegal act committed by the police or soldiers during the time of war or civil war is objectively difficult. In such circumstances, it is difficult to expect that the plaintiffs claim damages in a timely manner against the defendant et al. before the defendant's actions are taken. ② The systematic and collective action by the state authority such as the police or soldiers during the time of national emergency such as war or civil war, or remedy for the infringement of fundamental rights organized under the state authority's defense or silent, it is difficult to achieve the legal procedure. ③ The defendant, rather than the defendant who has a duty to confirm and guarantee the fundamental human rights of the people, did not deprive the lives of the people without due process, and did not take measures to find and compensate for damages, and the defendant's refusal to claim damages in a timely manner against the defendant et al. against the defendant et al. is considerably unfair until the expiration of the extinctive prescription period is considerably unfair.

Therefore, the defendant's defense of extinctive prescription is without merit.

4. Scope of damages.

(a) Amount of consolation money;

In light of all the circumstances revealed in the records and arguments in the case of Jindo National Reporting Association, such as mental suffering suffered by the deceased and their bereaved family members, social prejudice and economic difficulties that were continued for a long time thereafter, and there were no statistical income data for calculating the lost income at the time of the deceased's death, making it difficult to calculate the lost income for the deceased. In this case, it is necessary to take into account when calculating the original amount of consolation money for delay of compensation for a prolonged period of time as it falls under exceptional cases to be deemed that damages for delay of compensation liability should accrue from the date of closing argument (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Da103950, Jan. 13, 201, etc.). Meanwhile, in full view of all the circumstances revealed in the records and arguments in the case of this case, such as the fact that the consolation money for the deceased was caused by extreme confusion of Korean War, it is reasonable to determine the consolation money for the deceased as KRW 100,00,000, consolation money for the deceased's spouse as KRW 500,0000.

(b) Inheritance relationship;

The details of calculation of consolation money according to the inheritance relations of the deceased and their bereaved family members shall be as shown in the attached Form.

C. Sub-committee

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 1, 2, and 5 13,571,427 won, and to the plaintiff 3, and 4 86,428,570 won, and to the plaintiff 7 88,571,427 won and each of the above amounts, 5% per annum from April 19, 2012 to May 10, 2012, which is the date of the closing of argument of this case, and 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, from the next day to the date of full payment.

5. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims are reasonable, and it is decided as per Disposition by admitting them.

[Attachment]

Clinical trials on the mediation of judges (Presiding Judge)