Plaintiff (Law Firm Ha & Yang, Attorneys Lee Woo-soo et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Minister of Public Administration

June 10, 2010

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

On July 10, 2009, the Committee for Finding the Truth of Anti-National Acts (hereinafter “the Committee”) (hereinafter “the Committee”)’s decision on July 10, 2009 as the pro-Japanese act under Article 2 subparag. 9 of the Special Act on Finding the Truth of Anti-National Acts (hereinafter “Special Act”) is revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. Status, etc. of the Plaintiff and the instant commission

(1) The Deceased (the Deceased on September 14, 1949) was born on May 2, 1884, and was born on September 13, 194 to September 12, 194. The Deceased was born on September 13, 194 to September 12, 194.

(2) The Plaintiff is the deceased’s grandchildren.

(3) The instant commission was established pursuant to Article 3 of the Special Act in order to perform duties to ascertain the truth of pro-Japanese act.

B. Designation of pro-Japanese and anti-national actors against the deceased of the instant commission

The commission of this case selected the deceased as a person subject to pro-Japanese act on January 29, 2009 pursuant to Article 19(1) of the Special Act, and decided on July 10, 2009 on July 10, 2009, on the ground that the deceased was present at the meeting of the Douwon for the purpose of taking the position of the Douwon for the said three years under the Japanese rule and was conducting an act to respond to the advice of the Douwon for the Japanese governor (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. Succession to authority related to the disposition of this case

As the term of the instant commission’s activities expired on November 30, 2009, the Defendant succeeded to the authority relating to the instant disposition.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 to 3 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the defense prior to the merits

A. The defendant's assertion

(1) Claim as to whether the disposition is made

According to the special law, the committee of this case determines whether a person subject to the investigation of pro-Japanese act constitutes pro-Japanese act after investigating the pro-Japanese act of the person subject to the investigation of pro-Japanese act, prepare an investigation report, and report it to the National Assembly during the period of the President and the regular session of the National Assembly, and compile feed on pro-Japanese act. Therefore, the decision of pro-Japanese act by the committee of this case is merely the result of pure investigation conducted by the committee of this case, and it does not affect the rights and obligations of the person subject to the

(2) argument as to standing to sue

The Commission’s decision on pro-Japanese act did not infringe the legal interest of the person subject to investigation, and furthermore, the Plaintiff did not affect the legal status of the person subject to investigation, and thus, there is no legal interest to seek revocation of the above decision.

B. Determination

(1) Determination as to whether the disposition is made

(A) The term "disposition subject to an administrative litigation" means the exercise or refusal of public authority as an enforcement of law with respect to a concrete fact by an administrative agency, and other similar administrative actions (Article 2(1)1 of the Administrative Litigation Act), and the application of law which directly affect the rights and obligations of the people.

(B) Article 4 of the Special Act provides for the duties of the commission of this case concerning the selection of a person subject to investigation of pro-Japanese acts, investigation of pro-Japanese acts conducted by a person subject to investigation, collection and analysis of domestic and foreign materials related to pro-Japanese acts, and decision-making on pro-Japanese acts by a person subject to investigation of pro-Japanese acts. According to Article 25 of the same Act, the commission of this case shall prepare an investigation report on the activities of the commission of this case and report it to the National Assembly every year during the presidential and regular session of the National Assembly. According to Article 26 of the same Act, the commission of this case shall compile historical records on pro-Japanese acts within the period of its activities, and according to Article 27 of the same Act, the commission of this case

(C) Meanwhile, Article 10(1) of the Constitution provides that all citizens shall have dignity and value as human beings and have the right to pursue happiness. This provision guarantees an individual’s general personal right from the dignity of human beings protected by this provision.

(D) In the event the instant committee determines a person subject to investigation as a pro-Japanese act, it is highly likely that the person subject to investigation may be directly infringed upon his/her personal right, as well as the reputation of the person subject to investigation, due to damage to his/her social reputation. Furthermore, if the instant committee determines as a pro-Japanese act, the investigation report and the feed prepared regarding the act of pro-Japanese cannot be disclosed externally. Therefore, the instant committee limits the general personality right of the person subject to investigation determined as having committed pro-Japanese act, and thus, it is reasonable to deem that the instant committee is not a mere academic investigator but a legal application that directly affects the rights and obligations of the people.

(E) Article 2, Article 3, and Article 5 of the Special Act on the Reversion of Property for Pro-Japanese Collaborative Acts provides that the property of a person who committed an act under Article 2 subparagraphs 6 through 9 of Article 2 of the Special Act and the inherited property shall belong to the State under certain conditions, and Article 3 of the Special Act provides that the results investigated by the Committee in accordance with the provisions of Article 3 of the same Act may be invoked in investigating and selecting pro-Japanese Collaborative Acts. Thus, it is reasonable to view the decision of the Committee of this case as an act of legal application that may affect the people's property rights in this respect.

(F) Accordingly, the decision of the instant commission’s pro-Japanese act constitutes a disposition subject to administrative litigation. This part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

(2) Determination on standing to sue

(A) The disposition of this case requires the evaluation of the person subject to investigation as a pro-Japanese and the plaintiff, his lineal descendant, also is the descendants of pro-Japanese and anti-national actors. Thus, the disposition of this case is likely to harm the plaintiff's reputation, and it is directly limited to his personality rights due to damage to the social reputation of the person subject to investigation.

(B) Article 2 Subparag. 2 of the Special Act on the Reversion of Property of Pro-Japanese and Anti-National Collaborators to the State provides that property inherited from pro-Japanese and anti-Japanese actors shall also be pro-Japanese property. Thus, the Plaintiff, who is a lineal descendant of a person subject to investigation, is at risk of being restricted from property

(C) According to Articles 19(2), 24, and 28 of the Special Act, not only the person subject to investigation but also his/her lineal descendant, such as the Plaintiff, has the right to be notified of and objection to the selection of the person subject to investigation, the right to state his/her opinion in the course of investigation, and the right to object

(D) In light of the above, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff has a legal interest in seeking the revocation of the instant disposition. This part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

(1) The deceased is merely a fact that he respondeded to the advice of the Joseon General as a staff member of the First Lieutenant, and the content thereof does not constitute a serious kind of friendship. Therefore, the deceased’s act of acting as a staff member of the First Lieutenant cannot be deemed as a pro-Japanese act.

(2) Article 2 Subparag. 9 of the Special Act provides that, without considering all the circumstances leading up to the position of the senior secretary general of the Joseon General and the attitude of activities, only the fact that he acted as the senior secretary of the senior secretary general of the Joseon General without considering all the background leading up to the position of the senior secretary general of the Joseon General and does not stipulate any exception thereto. This is unconstitutional as it limits the personal rights of the deceased, who is a person subject to investigation, in violation of the principle of excessive prohibition under the Constitution or the principle of proportionality. Accordingly, the instant disposition based on the foregoing provision, which is unconstitutional,

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Table related statutes.

C. Determination

(1) Whether the deceased's act constitutes pro-Japanese anti-national act

In light of the fact that Article 2 subparagraph 9 of the Special Act defines the act of pro-Japanese under Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the same Act as the act of pro-Japanese under Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the same Act without prescribing any specific act unlike subparagraph 1 of the same Article, and stipulates the act of pro-Japanese activities as a pro-Japanese act, it is reasonable to interpret that the act of pro-Japanese under the above provision is per se recognized as an act of pro-Japanese Vice-Speaker, Assistant Vice-Speaker, Advisor, or reference, and does not require any additional and specific act. Therefore, as long as the deceased has performed as an act of pro-Japanese under Article 2 subparagraph 9 of the Special Act, such act shall be deemed as an act of pro-Japanese under Article 2 subparagraph 9 of the Special Act.

(2) Whether Article 2 subparagraph 9 of the Special Act is unconstitutional

(A) The general restriction on personal rights and the principle of proportionality or proportionality

As seen earlier, the general personality rights of a person subject to investigation are restricted due to the disposition of this case based on Article 2 subparagraph 9 of the Special Act. It is examined as to whether the above provision violates the principle of excessive prohibition or the principle of proportionality as it violates the principle of proportionality and the principle of proportionality, without specifically considering the following: (a) the reason why the position of a person subject to investigation was expressed in the position of a senior general inspector of the Joseon General, the position of the senior general inspector of the Republic of Korea; and

(B) nature and function of the senior officer of the Joseon General;

In addition to each description of evidence Nos. 4, 5, and 7, the following facts are recognized.

In 1894, it was established in the process of political reform at the time of Gap's 1894. At the beginning, it was established in order to give preferential treatment to those who have no more than two regulars of office or more, and it was changed into an organization to review and decide on important national matters, such as matters concerning the amendment of the law, by strengthening authority gradually as a result of the revision of the control in 1895 and 1898.In addition, it was established in order to use as an instrument to rationalize food control policies by raising the increase that the senior executive officer established in accordance with the Japanese colonial rule, which came into force on October 1, 1910 after the Japanese merger, maintained the control or administrative body of the Japanese senior executive officer as the Japanese senior advisory agency.

In the first time, the senior secretary of the Joseon General was comprised of the chairman, one vice-chairman, 15 advisers, 20 vice-chairmans, 35 vice-chairmans, 35 vice-chairmans, 35 vice-chairmans, 2 vice-chairmans, and 3 interpreters. Since the March 1 movement, the unauthorized ruling of Japanese system has been converted into the cultural governing organization based on the national divided policies, the control was revised around April 1921, and the number of vice-chairmans was divided into 65 vice-chairmans, and the number of members was adjusted to 65 vice-chairmans, and the period of office was extended to 3 years.

In the 1910s (ordinary No. 1), 1920's (ordinary No. 2), and 1930's (ordinary No. 33) the composition and function of the Japanese president were changed, respectively. The first period was the one of the duty-free officials given to the so-called "child-friendly" who mainly cooperateed in the Japanese merger, and the second period was the one of the duty-based investigation activities to obtain the effects of the Japanese president, focusing on the persons who have the general rule-making branch and the vice-principal, and the third period was the one of the advisory agencies, while the cooperation agencies of the Japanese president were the cooperation agencies, the political participation rights of the advisory agencies were strong, and the character of the advisory agency was the one of the advisory agencies.

On the other hand, the Joseon General Staff member was composed of a representative person who cooperates in daily affairs through various ways, such as public officials who participated in autonomy and advisory organizations such as high-ranking groups in the process of the first merger of Korea and Japan, Do governor and participating officers, representative executives of a representative pro-Japanese organization, Do Council, Do Council, Vice-Council, etc. However, after the third and first movement of Korea, the Japanese General Assembly adopted the so-called cultural governing system, which led to the reorganization of the control as the center leader of the previous leader, while the senior senior citizens, including local maintenance, were also included in the former senior senior citizens' career group, in order to actively participate in the development and improvement of the 1930s, the 1947777777, which led to the improvement of the 194777777, which led to the development and improvement of the local government's strategy, including the local government's participation in the development and improvement of the 19477777.

(C) Purpose of the Special Act

The preamble of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea provides that “The Korean nationals, who are light in the old history and tradition, succeed to the 4/19 democratic ideology, which stands against the law of the provisional government of the Republic of Korea established by the March 1st Movement, and based on the mission of democracy reform and peaceful unification of the fatherland,” thereby succeeding to the independence of the March 1st Movement, thereby declaring the receipt of the legal statistics of the provisional government of the Republic of Korea.

The preamble of the above Constitution is based on the historical and ideological basis of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, and the meaning of the spirit of the 3/1 movement declared by the above preamble of the Constitution and the receipt of the legal statistics by the provisional government of the Republic of Korea is confirmed to have been achieved based on the contribution and sacrifice of the persons who performed the independence movement by resisting against the Japanese colonialism, and the truth of the anti-national acts performed for the Japanese colonialism was identified, and it was enacted to contribute to the realization of social justice in the future by ascertaining the truth of the history and the spirit of the nation, and by making it historical decoration. The special law enacted for this purpose is recognized as legitimate.

(d) the adequacy of the method and the minimum of the infringement;

As seen earlier, as a fundamental principle, the Japanese colonial officer was established as a tool for the rationalization of colonial rule and the general politics of Japanese colonial rule. The adviser and staff of the Japanese colonial rule have been commissioned and appointed from among those who have contributed to the Japanese colonial rule, those who have contributed to the Japanese colonial rule, or those who have contributed to the Japanese colonial rule in the process of governing the Japanese colonial rule, and those who have actively cooperated with the Japanese colonial rule or local rule, and the adviser and staff of the Japanese colonial rule have been employed in promoting the Japanese colonial rule or have been mobilized to actively cooperate in the Japanese colonial rule at the same time, such as the publicity of the Japanese colonial rule and the Japanese colonial rule, and the publicity of the Japanese colonial rule, the Japanese colonial rule has been mobilized for the Japanese colonial rule.

In light of the nature and function of the vice-national advisory organization of the Japanese governor of the Korean War, the process in which persons who participated in the Japanese governor of the Japanese governor of the Japanese governor of the Japanese governor of the Japanese governor, the process in which persons who participated in the Japanese governor of the Japanese governor of the Japanese governor of the Japanese governor of the Japanese governor of the Japanese governor, and the contents of activities as the adviser and staff of the Japanese governor of the Japanese governor of the Japanese governor of the Japanese governor of the Japanese governor of the Japanese governor of the Japanese governor

Therefore, Article 2 subparagraph 9 of the Special Act does not violate the minimum principle of infringement inasmuch as it is difficult to present a less infringing means to achieve the legislative purpose as it is a legitimate means to achieve the legislative purpose as a legitimate means to achieve the legislative purpose of the Special Act.

(E) Balance of the legal interests;

Even though Article 2 subparagraph 9 of the Special Act does not specify the specific types of conduct-friendly anti-national acts in detail, the act committed by a person subject to investigation as an adviser or a witness in the position of the Japanese governor-general, it is reasonable to view that the act is larger than that of a person subject to investigation or a lineal descendant whose public interest is infringed pursuant to the aforementioned Special Act, taking into account the purpose of enacting the Special Act and the purpose of legislation

(f) Sub-determination

Article 2 Subparag. 9 of the Special Act does not violate the principle of excessive prohibition under the Constitution or the principle of proportionality, so the instant disposition is legitimate. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion on a different premise is rejected.

4. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed on the ground that it is without merit.

[Attachment]

Judges Sung Sung (Presiding Judge)