1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to that part is dismissed.

2...

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is that the part concerning the plaintiff's assertion and its determination (the 6th to 10th, the 11th to 5th, the 3th to 13th below) related to Article 2 subparagraph 7 of the Special Act among the judgments of the court of first instance should be dismissed as follows, and that the attached Acts and subordinate statutes should be changed into the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes of the end of this judgment. The corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same.

The relevant part shall be quoted in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Whether pro-Japanese and anti-national acts under subparagraph 7 of Article 2 of the Special Act are performed.

A. Plaintiff 1) Article 2 Subparag. 7 of the former Special Act on Finding the Truth of Anti-National Acts under the Japanese colonial Rule (amended by Act No. 11494, Oct. 22, 2012) (hereinafter “former main provision”), and Article 2 Subparag. 7 of the same Act (amended by Act No. 11494, Oct. 22, 2012), and the relevant provision of the amended Act

A) Following the amendment, the part of “the public interest in the merger between Korea and Japan” was deleted. According to the main clause of the former main issue at the time of the disposition, where it is not recognized as having been committed by the public interest in the merger between Korea and Japan, and it cannot be deemed as an act of pro-Japanese, Article 2 of the Addenda of the Special Act (hereinafter “Supplementary Rule”).

(2) In light of the fact that the application of Article 2 of the Addenda to the former Act cannot be permitted as a retroactive legislation that goes against the principle of statutory reservation, etc. and that the disposition pursuant to the former Act cannot be deemed a disposition pursuant to the main provision unless disadvantageous results such as the compilation of feed pursuant to the former main provision are resolved, etc., the application of the main provision through Article 2 of the Addenda to the former Act is contrary to the principle of statutory reservation or the principle of prohibition of retroactive legislation, etc., which is the core content of the rule of law under the Constitution. (2) (based on the premise that the former main provision is applied), B is not subject to D act on the ground that it has contributed to the merger between Korea and Japan.