1. In a case where a public prosecution was instituted based on evidence, etc. collected by a State agency due to an illegal act, etc. during the investigation process, and a conviction became final and conclusive, but the existence of grounds for retrial is found later and the judgment of innocence became final and conclusive in the retrial procedure, the obligee cannot expect the State to claim damages until the judgment of innocence becomes final and

Therefore, it is not permissible for the state, which is the debtor, to claim the completion of extinctive prescription as an abuse of rights.

However, in such a case, barring any special circumstance, a creditor shall exercise his/her right within a six-month period equivalent to the suspension of prescription under the Civil Act from the final judgment of acquittal on which such disability was terminated, and shall be determined based on the date of filing a lawsuit claiming compensation for damages in principle as to whether the right was exercised within

However, even if a creditor did not file a claim for damages within such period, where a claim for criminal compensation under the Criminal Compensation and Restoration of Honor Act was filed, there are special circumstances to extend the "reasonable period" of the exercise of the right to prevent the defense of extinctive prescription. Thus, if a claim for damages is filed within six months from the date on which the decision on criminal compensation became final and conclusive, the right may be deemed to have been exercised within a reasonable period. However, even if such period does not exceed three years from the date on which

(See Supreme Court Decision 2013Da201844 Decided December 12, 2013, etc.). (See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da201844, Dec. 12, 2013).

On February 27, 1980, the network D was arrested and detained by investigators belonging to the Busan City Police Bureau, and was prosecuted on May 30, 1980.