1. The Defendant: 5% per annum from November 27, 2019 to January 8, 2020 with respect to each of the Plaintiffs’ KRW 35,874,200 and each of the said money.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. 1) On February 28, 1974, the Deceased was found guilty of the charges of violating the antipublic law, such as the attached Form, issued a detention warrant on March 7, 1974, while he was under investigation by an investigator belonging to the Defendant for about eight (8) days, and was prosecuted as a charge of violating the antipublic law, such as the violation of the attached Form, at the Seoul Criminal District Court. 2) On July 24, 1974, the above court convicted the Deceased of all the charges against the Deceased on July 24, 1974, and sentenced the Deceased one year and six (1) months of his imprisonment.

[Judgment subject to a retrial in this case (hereinafter “instant judgment subject to a retrial”) of the above court. The appeal by the deceased and the prosecutor on December 9, 1974 was all dismissed (Seoul High Court 74No112), and the appeal by the Supreme Court on April 8, 1975 (Supreme Court 75Do279) was dismissed (see Supreme Court Decision 75Do279), and the judgment subject to a retrial against the deceased became final and conclusive.

3) From February 28, 1974, the Deceased was detained for a total of 586 days from October 6, 1975 on the ground of the expiration of the term of punishment until the time he was released on October 6, 1975. B. The Plaintiff D, an infant of the Deceased, filed a petition for review of the judgment subject to a retrial with the Seoul Central District Court 2014 Inventory 9.

On July 28, 2015, the foregoing court rendered a ruling to commence a new trial on the instant judgment subject to a retrial on the ground that, on the grounds that the deceased was investigated in the state of illegal confinement since the time when the warrant of detention was issued and executed by the Central Information Division investigators without a warrant, there was grounds for retrial under Articles 420 subparag. 7 and 422 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

2. On December 17, 2015, the above court rendered a judgment not guilty of the facts charged by the deceased on the ground that the statements and court statements in the investigative agency of the deceased and co-defendants were made in the state of illegal arrest, long-term illegal confinement, assault or intimidation by investigators, and mental pressure by adviser cannot be acknowledged.

A prosecutor shall make the judgment above.