beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On January 15, 1976, when the deceased F (Death on December 20, 2013) was enrolled in the Department of State History at G University, G University, the Plaintiffs asserted that the deceased F was committed on December 26, 1975, and there is no evidence to acknowledge the fact that the deceased F was detained from January 15, 1976 according to the overall purport of the statement and pleading set forth in subparagraph 7-1 of the evidence No. 7, and the fact that the deceased F was in custody from January 15, 1976. The Army Security Headquarters (hereinafter “Safety Headquarters”) is suspected of violating the National Security Act.
(2) On January 7, 1976, the deceased F was detained on January 27, 1976 on the ground that he/she committed a violation of the Presidential Emergency Measure No. 9 (hereinafter “Emergency Measure No. 9”) to safeguard the national security and public order of the Republic of Korea (hereinafter “Emergency Measure No. 9”) with the aim of avoiding arrest even though he/she was aware that he/she was a person who committed a crime corresponding to a fine or heavier punishment and was receiving the number of times from the authority.
(Seoul Criminal Court 76No. 156). All appeals filed by the networkF and the prosecutor. However, the Seoul High Court dismissed all the appeals by the networkF and the prosecutor on November 16, 1976 (Seoul High Court 76No1767), and the networkF renounced the appeal and the judgment on November 17, 1976 became final and conclusive as is.
(B) The Constitutional Court, on March 21, 2013, rendered a decision of unconstitutionality (2010HunBa70, 132, 170 (merged) as to Emergency Measure No. 9 on April 18, 2013, declared that Emergency Measure No. 9 was unconstitutional and void (hereinafter “instant judgment subject to new trial”) and that the Supreme Court, on April 18, 2013, declared that the Emergency Measure No. 9 was unconstitutional and void (hereinafter “instant judgment”).