Among the judgment subject to a retrial, the part concerning the claim of consolation money and the claim of the deceased I by the plaintiff (the plaintiff in review) respectively.

1. Facts of premise;

A. 1) Plaintiff B and I (hereinafter “Plaintiff B, etc.”) were final and conclusive in the judgment subject to a retrial.

On May 25, 2012, I brought a lawsuit against the Defendant for mental compensation, etc. (Plaintiff B: Plaintiff B, etc., who was illegally arrested or detained by the investigator affiliated with the Defendant, and was convicted of committing assault, various advisers, etc., without infringing upon the right to interview and communicate with his defense counsel, and was sentenced to a conviction based on an unconstitutional and invalid emergency measure, which was based on the unconstitutional and invalid emergency measure, and has damaged honor by spreading it to the media as if the organization of the anti-state organization was the cause of the organization, and has undermined the discriminatory surveillance and restriction at the time of taking place) on the ground of Defendant’s tort (Plaintiff B: negative damages; KRW 426,241,061; KRW 80,000,000; KRW 40,000,000, and KRW 800,000,000, each of such delayed damages, I:80,000 won, and its delay damages).

On April 25, 2013, the court of first instance rejected the Plaintiff B, etc.’s claim for consolation money, his father’s portion of consolation money, and the Plaintiff’s claim for consolation money (i.e., KRW 260,629,333 won (i.e., KRW 300,000; KRW 200,000; KRW - KRW 3636,3035,3636, 2036, 305, 3036, 307, 2036, 305, etc.) as to the portion of the Plaintiff’s passive claim pursuant to Article 18(2) of the former Act on the Compensation for Democratization Movement (amended by Act No. 13289, May 18, 2015; hereinafter “former Act on the Compensation for Democratization Movement”).