2014Guhap7473 A Action to seek confirmation of invalidity of the decision of the victim

1. B

2. C

3. D;

4. E.

5. F;

6. G.

7. H;

8. I

9. J;

10. K;

11, L

12. M;

13.N

A truth-Finding and Restoration of Honor of Victims

October 22, 2015

November 12, 2015

1. All plaintiffs' lawsuits are dismissed.

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

In accordance with the "Special Act on the Finding the Truth of the State and the Restoration of Honor of Victims" (hereinafter referred to as the "A Act"), it is confirmed that the disposition taken by the defendant as a victim is invalid on the date on which the list of victims is entered in the column for determining the victims.

1. Details of the disposition;

After receiving the report of the victim and the bereaved family of the victim pursuant to the procedure prescribed by the A Act, the defendant decided 13,564 persons, including those on the list of the victims of the attached Form, as victims of the A, and 29,239 persons as bereaved family members of the victims by April 2009 (hereinafter referred to as "decision on the victims of the attached Form") by April 209.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence No. 2 and purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion

The persons entered in the list of victims in the attached list shall be excluded from the scope of victims stipulated by the A Act, since they are persons who have damaged the essence of the liberal democratic fundamental order as persons who actively led to fire-fighting (D type), such as the head of the Suwon Military Force Command or the chief of the Intermediate Department (A type), 0 core departments (B type), police officers and Dongs for the South-North Korea, homicides, police officers and other persons involved in the election, etc. (C type), homicides who murdered a resident who is not a police officer for the suppression of a military force (E type), and persons unrelated to A (E type), and thus have damaged the nature of the liberal democratic basic order. Nevertheless, the defendant decided as victims of the disposition of this case. The disposition of this case violates fundamental rights such as the plaintiffs' personality rights, such as the bereaved family members of the victim, and the dignity and value of human beings, equality rights, and the basic principles of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea and the principles of due process.

3. Whether the plaintiffs' lawsuit is legitimate

A. Defendant’s defense prior to the merits

The Plaintiffs cannot be deemed to have a legal interest protected by A law, which is a third party, not the other party to the instant disposition, and therefore, there is no standing to seek confirmation of invalidity of the instant disposition.

B. Determination

(A) Even if a third party is not the other party of an administrative disposition, if the legal interests protected by the administrative disposition are infringed by the law, a party is entitled to a decision of propriety thereof by filing an administrative litigation seeking the revocation or nullification of the administrative disposition. The legal interests referred to in this context refer to cases where there are individual, direct, and specific interests protected by the relevant law and regulations. This does not include cases where a person has a factual and economic interests, such as general, indirect abstract interests commonly held by the general public as a result of protecting public interests. Furthermore, the legal interests protected by the relevant law and regulations are not protected by the law and regulations based on the relevant disposition, but are not protected by the law and regulations based on the relevant disposition, but clearly protected by the law and regulations based on the relevant disposition, and the legal interests specifically protected by the relevant law and regulations based on the relevant disposition are not clearly protected by the relevant law and regulations, and the legal interests are not clearly protected by the relevant law and regulations based on the relevant disposition, but are interpreted to include individual, indirect, and specific interests, 2014.

On the other hand, A law, a law based on the disposition of this case, aims to contribute to the enhancement of human rights, democratic development and national harmony by ascertaining the truth of A and restoring honor of victims and their bereaved family members related to this case. The main contents of A law are to establish a committee for the investigation of truth, procedures for the investigation of truth, determination of victims and their bereaved family members, support for victims and their bereaved family members, and the "Enforcement Decree of A law" and the "Rules on the Registration of Family Relationship under the A law", the "Enforcement Rule of A law," the "Enforcement Rule of the A law," the "Enforcement Ordinance of the A law," and the "Guidelines Ordinance on the Investigation of Facts and Deliberation of Victims according to the Report of Victims" are the matters necessary for the enforcement of the higher law, and the above contents do not go beyond the scope of the above matters, and there are no other provisions with the content and intent to protect the interests of victims and their bereaved family members.

Therefore, the underlying law of the instant disposition is merely protecting the interests of the victims related to A and their bereaved family members, and it is judged that the interests of other persons are not subject to protection, and it does not seem that there are other laws and regulations related to the instant disposition.

B. In light of the above legal principles, the health team, Plaintiff B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I were determined by the Defendant as the bereaved family members of the victim other than the victim attached to the attached Form A. The Plaintiff J, K, and L are soldiers participating in the suppression operations at the time A. The Plaintiff M is the bilateral president of P who declared martial law at the time A. The Plaintiff N is the non-governmental organization, and the Plaintiff N is the representative of the Committee on Countermeasures for the Establishment of History, which is the non-governmental organization, not all the other parties to the disposition of the instant case. As seen earlier, it does not include the content of protecting the interests of the victims or their bereaved family members, and it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiffs did not have any benefits individually, directly, and specifically protected by the relevant laws and regulations or the relevant laws and regulations on the disposition of the instant case.

Furthermore, even if the basic rights, such as personality rights, human dignity and value, and equality rights, under the Constitution, can be based on the legal interest seeking nullification of the instant disposition, as alleged by the Plaintiffs, the social evaluation of the Plaintiffs’ personality cannot be deemed to have been undermined due to the instant disposition, and there is no possibility of infringement of the right to equality (see Constitutional Court Order 2009Hun-Ma146, Nov. 25, 2010), and the fundamental rights asserted by the Plaintiffs, such as personality rights, cannot be deemed as legal interest of the Plaintiffs that can seek nullification of the instant disposition.

C. On this issue, the plaintiffs B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I asserted that the purpose of the A law is to restore the honor of the persons who have made a sacrifice by the armed forces, etc. and their bereaved family members, and the plaintiffs asserted that there exists a legal interest in seeking confirmation of invalidity of the instant disposition, which was determined as a victim of the A, as the perpetrator, as the bereaved family members of the victims who were killed by the armed forces, etc. of the Republic of Korea.

However, in accordance with the procedure prescribed by the A Act, the Plaintiff is determined as a bereaved family member of the victim other than the victim of the attached Form and received the legal interest already protected under the said Act. The Plaintiff is not in the position of the victim or his bereaved family member in relation to the third party stated in the list of the victim of the attached Form. As seen earlier, the A Act does not have any provision with the content and purport of protecting the interest of the victim and the persons other than the bereaved family member. Furthermore, as long as the instant disposition does not grant the Plaintiff the duty of consolation and conspiracy to the Gongsan armed forces, etc., the perpetrator of the instant disposition, as in the Plaintiff’s assertion, even if the personal rights, etc. may be damaged due to the occurrence of a situation where he/she should obey or commemorate the said disposition at the same place as the perpetrator of the instant disposition, it is merely an infringement of factual and indirect interests, and it cannot be deemed as an infringement of individual, specific, and direct interest protected by the A Act.

Therefore, we cannot accept these plaintiff's assertion.

In the end, there is no legal interest in seeking nullification of the disposition of this case against the plaintiffs.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, since the plaintiffs' lawsuit is unlawful, it is decided to dismiss all of the lawsuits. It is so decided as per Disposition.

The presiding judge shall be appointed by a judge.

Judges Park Jae-young

Judges Domination

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.