A. During the period from October 19, 1948 to August 2949, when the case of sacrificeing civilians in the female water area occurred, there was a case of murdering residents on the grounds that soldiers belonging to the Armed Forces Nos. 2, 4, 5, 12, and 15, and the police officers belonging to the Water Station, the Police Station, and the Steering Police Station, etc., were anti-military co-offenders, the police officers, and the police officers belonging to the Steering Police Station, etc. were sub-persons or sub-persons.

(hereinafter referred to as "marries in leisure areas"). (b)

The former History Settlement Commission established pursuant to the Framework Act on the Settlement of History (hereinafter referred to as the "Framework Act on Settlement of History") for the Truth Reconciliation of the Decision of the former History Settlement Commission for the Reconciliation of Truth (hereinafter referred to as the "Reconciliation Commission") was investigated into the order of the leisure region by means of the applicant investigation, reference witness investigation, data investigation, on-site investigation, etc. upon application for the Finding of Truth.

On June 29, 2010, the past History Settlement Board rendered a decision to ascertain the truth to confirm the sacrifice of 124 residents with respect to the case in the female water area.

(2) The truth-finding decision of this case contains the following: (a) the Plaintiff’s 50 persons indicated in the column for the victim of the Plaintiff’s list (hereinafter “the deceased of this case”) were the victims of the instant case.

C. The relevant plaintiffs are the bereaved family members of the deceased of this case, and the specific relationship of relatives is indicated in the annexed inheritance relationship and the corresponding amount calculation column.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements in Gap's 1, 51 through 97 (including branch numbers in the case of additional numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to liability for damages

A. The 1st Plaintiffs’ assertion by the parties, and the military police officers of the Defendant did not go through due process without any justifiable reason, and thus, have the right to a trial in accordance with the fundamental rights of the people guaranteed by the Constitution, the right to life, and due process.