1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 19, 1948, the Army Headquarters of the former Military sacrifice case ordered on October 14, 1948 to leave the Republic of Korea for the suppression of the Jeju 43 Incident, and approximately approximately 2,000 military personnel belonging to the 14th Armed Forces, who opposed thereto, caused insurrection.

Accordingly, the government established the Earth Headquarters in Gwangju, declared martial law in the area of fish-water, and ordered the suppression group to recall the drinking water, such as 2, 4, 5, 12, 15 solidarity in the Army. On October 27, 1948, the suppression group recovered the drinking water around October 27, 1948.

The suppression forces, which deprived of female trees, were engaged in the anti-state army operations centered on the Dogsan Islands. From October 1948 to July 1949, a number of civilians were killed in the course of covering the anti-state army cooperation and persons suspected of benefiting from the armed forces in the Republic of Korea, such as the frontnam-gun, the front line, the land surface, the front line, the front line, the front line, the front line, the front line, the front line, the front line, and the front line.

(hereinafter referred to as "the civilian sacrifice case in the Gu"). (b)

On July 8, 2008, the Committee on the Settlement of History for the Truth and Reconciliation of the Truth and Reconciliation of the Truth and Reconciliation (hereinafter “The Committee on the Settlement of History”) confirmed the deceased, etc., recorded in the column of the deceased (hereinafter collectively referred to as “the deceased”) as the victim of the previous case’s sacrifice case, on July 3, 2008.

C. The plaintiffs and the deceased are bereaved family members of the deceased, and their specific details of inheritance and their shares of inheritance are as indicated in attached Form 3.

【Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 26 and purport of whole pleadings】

2. The parties' assertion

A. The gist of the plaintiffs' assertion was that the military personnel or police officers of the defendant murdered the deceased without due cause, and the defendant, as a supervisor, suffered from the deceased and their bereaved family members.