본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
서울중앙지방법원 2015.05.21 2013가합544324

손해배상(기)

Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The investigation and punishment 1) Plaintiff A, I, and Q on October 27, 1978 for the National Security and the protection of public order (hereinafter “Emergency Measure No. 9”) (hereinafter “Emergency Measure No. 9”).

(2) On November 22, 1978, the Seoul District Court Youngpool Branch 78Kahap296 dated November 22, 1978, the list of Plaintiffs A, I, and Q was investigated by the investigative agency on suspicion of violation.

2. The charges of violation of Emergency Decree No. 9, as stated in the facts charged, were prosecuted, and the above court recognized the facts charged on February 24, 1979 and sentenced the Plaintiff A to imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months, suspension of qualification for the Plaintiff A, and one year and six months, suspension of qualification for the Plaintiff I and Q, respectively.

Accordingly, Plaintiff A, I, Q and Prosecutor appealed from Seoul High Court 79No458. The above appellate court dismissed Plaintiff A, I, Q and Prosecutor’s appeal, respectively.

On July 2, 1979 and June 26, 1979, Plaintiff A and I appealed respectively to the Supreme Court, but withdrawn each appeal. The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

(3) Plaintiff A, and Q were released by July 17, 1979 according to each of the above judgments, and the same day was suspended. Plaintiff A was released by August 15, 1979 on the same day. Plaintiff A, I, and Q filed a petition for a new trial against the instant judgment subject to a new trial as Seoul Southern District Court 201 Inventory201, on the ground that the instant judgment constitutes a case where the facts charged in attached Form 2 was not committed a crime, and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time, pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, Defendant A, I, and Q was acquitted.

B. AG for Nonparty AG, the attached list

2. On the charge of violating Emergency Measure No. 9 in relation to the facts charged stated in the indictment, the person was nominated and distributed as suspicion, and was engaged in the escape life until October 1979.

C. Family relationship 1 B, C, Nonparty AH, Plaintiff D, E, F, G, and H are the parents and siblings of Plaintiff A, and Nonparty A.